The deadline for having sows in Canada into group housing has been extended to 2029 after it became clear the target of having 100 per cent of sows in group housing by 2024 was not going to be met. 
It is estimated that Canada’s producers are presently on course for approximately 66 per cent of their sows being in group housing in 2024. Producers will now have until 2029 to comply with the industry’s Code of Practice. 
Yolande Seddon, an assistant professor in swine behaviour at the Western College of Veterinarian Medicine in Saskatoon and a scientist at the Prairie Swine Centre, gave those in attendance and online at a seminar an update on the reasons for the extension of the deadline, known as Code 2029. 
Seddon was speaking at the recent Group Sow Housing Seminar, hosted by the Prairie Swine Centre in Saskatoon. 
The Code of Practice is reviewed every five years, with 10-year periods to act upon recommendations. It is led by the National Farm Animal Care Council. Seddon is a researcher/academic on the council’s Code of Practice pig committee. 
“In 2014, we had this change that gestating sows and gilts must be housed in groups in any barn that is a new build or brought into use or essentially renovated,” Seddon said. 
The move to group housing was to remove the animals from stalls. The target date was set at 2024. In 2019, when there was a five-year review of the code, an estimated 30 per cent of sows were living in group housing. 
“If we were to look forward to this 2024 timeline, it was predicted that we might have about 66 per cent of the national herd (in group housing),” Seddon said. “Here we are in 2022, and we could assume we might have 51 per cent.” 
She said the 2019 review wanted to identify what it would take to advance group housing nationally. 
She said she wasn’t going to go through all the science, but as part of the review there was a thorough scientific evaluation of existing literature around freedom of movement in sows and their welfare. 
“We did identify that some potential alternatives may not be useful or viable, like turn-around stalls . . .  they didn’t show a hugely measurable benefit to the animal, and it’s still a highly confined system. 
“We specifically, at the Prairie Swine Centre, did research looking at the animal’s point of view.” 
Given the choice, sows wanted out of their stalls to roam somewhat and to forage for food. 
Seddon said scientists also looked at the benefits of providing sows with weekly exercise. 
“We did try to look at a short period of time that might be reasonable to do in a commercial production system. We looked at 10 minutes of exercise once a week and compared it to animals that remained in stalls, and the animals in group housing throughout gestation. 
“So, what did we conclude? Exercise, as we know, is beneficial to humans (and) it is also beneficial for sows if they have the opportunity for extra movement.” 
She said the study did not deliver measurable benefits to animal welfare or productivity across the herd. 
She estimated in a barn of 500 sows, it would mean 83 hours of work every week. 
“The conclusion is that this isn’t a viable alternative to group stall housing. Instead, it was much better to focus investments toward conversion to group housing, instead of having this essentially being a distraction.” 
With the 2024 deadline out of reach, said those involved in the review, had two choices. 
“We had a choice to have industry members going into non-compliance. Or you have the ability to extend the deadline. The choice was made to extend the deadline after discussions with provincial pork boards.” 
She said the industry is confident that close to 100 per cent of sows will be in group housing by 2029. 
“We considered that making barns non-compliant wasn’t necessarily going to achieve anything. It wasn’t going to change anything for animal welfare — there were still going to be sows in stalls — and instead it was just going to cause an industry to shrink.” 
She said other countries would ramp up production, and Canada would lose market share. 
Seddon said the Code of Practice is a national guideline for how to care for animals. There are legislated requirements to protect against animal cruelty or it could be an industry-imposed expectation. 
“We also have recommendations which is additional practices you can do to improve animal welfare. It also includes stakeholder involvement . . . That is producers, veterinarians, retailers, pork packing plants and also animal welfare, charities and also consumers of pork products. Together these stakeholders need to reach out a consensus in order for them to change and have an improved process. 
“The developments going forward should therefore reflect, not only the latest developments in science, but how the stakeholders feel about the developments and what they can accommodate.” •
— By Cam Hutchinson