Animal Systems Team. College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences University of Illinois September 1999

Transcription

1 Illinois Animal Agriculture Animal Systems Team College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences University of Illinois September 1999 Animal agriculture is vitally important to the State of Illinois, both currently and in the future. Animal products provide high quality nutrition for humans and a large job base for Illinois citizens. Consider these additional facts: Animal Production in Illinois Provides unique role to play in sustainable agriculture Supports rural revitalization and job creation Generates $2.4 billion of total income to producers Generates $12 billion of economic activity in support industries Provides alternative enterprises and employment Reduces soil erosion by utilizing forage crops and pasture Utilizes crop residues and by-product feeds Improves water quality by recycling soil nutrients Contributes to an expanding export market Provides value added products from grain and forage utilization Produces recycled fertilizer Economic Value Cash sales from marketing Illinois livestock and poultry totaled $2.39 billion in 1997 (Table 1). These numbers do not include the income generated by the horse, pet and aquaculture industries. The State of Illinois receives over $50 million in tax revenues from racing each year. The income from dairy goats, fur farming, aquaculture, exotic animals and exotic birds must also be considered. Additional Economic Activity It is estimated that for every dollar received from animal sales, an additional $5 is generated in economic activity in support industries. This amounts to a total of $12 billion and includes merchants, feed dealers, bankers, doctors, fertilizer dealers, equipment dealers, veterinarians, car and truck dealers, food processors, and other support industries. The strength and viability of the livestock and poultry industries have a major impact on rural and urban communities throughout the state.

2 Table 1. Total Income from Illinois Animal Production Sales (1997) Species Market Receipts Receipts from Feeder Animals Receipts from Breeding Stock Total ($ millions) ($ millions) ($ millions) ($ millions) Swine 1, ,065.0 Beef Cattle Dairy Poultry & Turkey Horses Sheep and Wool Total 1, , Includes milk and $24 million for cull cows and bull calves. 2 Does not include value of fertile eggs sold from turkey breeding farms. 3 For horses this also included nonbreeding stock. Feed Utilization The importance of animal agriculture is also illustrated by the amount of grain, protein supplement, and forage that is utilized in the production of value-added products such as meat, milk, eggs and wool (Table 2). This does not include acres utilized as pasture. In addition, animal production utilizes many feed products that humans do not consume, such as damaged grains, hay silage, pasture, grain by-product feeds, and the refuse from grain harvesting. Sustainable Agriculture In any discussion of sustainable agriculture, it is important to consider animal production as either a primary enterprise or an alternative enterprise. The production and utilization of forage crops and pasture help to greatly reduce soil erosion and improve water quality. Animal waste provides organic matter and soil nutrients that reduces the cost of purchased fertilizer and improves soil quality organically.

3 Table 2. Grain, Protein Supplement and Harvested Forage Used for Animal Production in Illinois Species Bushels of Grain Tons of Protein Supplement Tons of Hay Equivalent* Swine 99,458, , Beef Cattle 41,680,000 24,903 1,740,750 Dairy 14,950,000 92,150 1,170,000 Poultry 5,663,794 52, Horses 14,285, , ,000 Sheep 507,888 2,671 26,070 Total 207,017,509 1,381,751 4,436,820 *Haylage and corn silage have been converted to hay equivalent. Competitiveness of Illinois Animal Agriculture The future potential for animal agriculture is discussed in outlook statements for species and program areas. Illinois taxpayers, consumers, and agri-businesses cannot afford to watch animal agriculture in Illinois decline. The united commitment and dedicated efforts of producers, commodity organizations, agri-business, state government, departments, colleges and universities are necessary to reverse this downward trend. For More Information Department Home Page: SpecieNet Home Pages: BeefNet: DairyNet PorkNet PoultryNet SheepNet

4 SWINE OUTLOOK Situation Pork production in Illinois is the third largest cash income farm commodity in the state ($1.011 billion in 1997). Ranking number 4 nationally in number of hogs marketed (, the Illinois swine industry is undergoing a major paradigm shift. The number of swine farms has declined steadily, from 50,000 in 1970 to 5,750 on December 1, 1998 (down 48% in the last five years and 62.5% since 1990). However, inventory number of hogs was 4,850,000 on December 1, 1999, down only 15% since The number of hogs and pigs on Illinois farms on June 1, 1999 was 4.3 million head, only three percent less than June Thus, as number of hog operations have declined, the size of hog farms has increased. Changes have occurred primarily in the largest and smallest groups of producers. The largest operations have gained the most market share and the very smallest are showing the greatest losses. In 1997, 6% of all Illinois hog farms produced 45% of the Illinois hogs while 69% of the hog farms produced 16% of the hogs. The remaining 39% of the Illinois hogs were produced by 25.2% of Illinois hog farms. Production systems are rapidly changing from family farm, farrow-to-finish operations to specialized contract production, such as contract breed-to-wean and wean-to-finish systems. Illinois pork production combines many inputs into a complex process of converting grains, high-protein feed ingredients, vitamins, minerals and water into live hogs and eventually pork and pork products. This ultimate goal is attained by various production systems: 1. Family farrow-to-finish farms that involve all stages of production, from breeding through finishing to market weights of about 260 pounds (labor provided primarily by family members; these make up the vast majority of the smaller operations). 2. Farrow-nursery farms which sell pound feeder pigs to grow-finish farms (becoming fewer each year). 3. Feeder pig finishing farms that purchase pound feeder pigs and finish to market weight of pounds. 4. Contract production a) Breed-to-wean b) Wean-to-finish ( pounds) c) Wean-to-feeder pig size (10-60 pounds) d) Feeder pig-to-finish ( pounds) Family farms produce most of their grain, while contract farms use commercially prepared feeds. Feed is the major production input to the pork production process, accounting for over 65% of all production expenses. Whether Illinois pigs are raised in pastures or in totally enclosed barns, systems approaches dominate pork production. Repeatable methods and specialization characterize the Illinois pork producer regardless of the type of facilities he or she uses. The choice of facility type is mainly a balancing of capital investment, labor requirement and management expertise. Challenges Manure regulations can dictate swine farm expansion and development plans Pigs per sow per year must improve in Illinois swine herds

5 Risk Management/Contracting (Production and Packer) Alternative Production Systems Evaluating Contracts Business Management Plans Evaluating Male Fertility Pork Quality/Pork Quality Assurance Ventilation/Building Management/Air Quality Swine Health Management Plans How to Restructure the Business Programs Strategies seminar Area Swine Seminars Special topical seminars A. I. Seminar Swine Health Seminar Roundtable discussions (Focus groups) Farm visits and problem solving Alternative production systems seminars Staff Gilbert Hollis, Extension Specialist, Urbana Robert Knox, Extension Specialist, Urbana Ed Ballard, Extension Educator, Effingham Dan Jennings, Extension Educator, Rockford Dean Oswald, Extension Educator, Macomb Dave Seibert, Extension Educator, E. Peoria Ted Funk, Extension Agricultural Engineer, Urbana Larry Firkins, Extension Veterinarian, Urbana Gary Schnitkey, Agricultural Economist, Urbana Wes Winter, Unit Extension Educator, Freeport Jim Endress, Farm Management, Rockford Ruth Hambleton, Farm Management, Mt. Vernon