June 30, 2016 - Egg Farmers of Canada and the National Farm Animal Care Council (NFACC) have announced the launch of the public comment period on the draft Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Layers. The public comment period allows stakeholders - poultry producers, consumers and others with an interest in the welfare of laying hens - to view the draft Code and provide input to the final Code. The draft revised Code is the result of the unique consensus-based, multi-stakeholder approach used across various agricultural sectors, which brings together all relevant stakeholders with responsibility for animal care standards. “Egg Farmers of Canada is committed to continuous improvements and a high standard of care for laying hens in a manner that is sustainable and implementable by all farmers in Canada,” said Peter Clarke, Chairman of Egg Farmers of Canada. “We value the National Farm Animal Care Council’s leadership and the rigorous, multi-stakeholder approach to developing the evidence-based standards that will enhance our national Animal Care Program,” he added. Once finalized, the revised Code will promote sound management and welfare practices through recommendations and requirements for housing, care, transportation, and other animal husbandry practices. The process began in April 2012, using the NFACC Code development process. Egg Farmers of Canada initiated the review with the support of the Canadian Poultry and Egg Processors Council and Pullet Growers of Canada. “The Code development process helps diverse communities work together to improve the lives of farm animals,” said poultry welfare expert Dr. Ian Duncan, representing the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies on the Code Committee. “We hope for broad participation in the public comment period. It’s an important opportunity to improve the quality and success of each Code.” The draft Code and the public comment system is accessible All comments must be submitted through the online system. The public comment period closes on August 29, 2016. The Code Development Committee will consider the submitted comments after the close of the comment period and the plan is that the final layer Code of Practice will be released by the end of 2016. A Scientific Committee report summarizing research conclusions on priority welfare topics for laying hens can be found online alongside the draft Code. This peer-reviewed report aided the discussions of the Code Development Committee as it prepared the draft Code of Practice. The report, developed by world-renowned animal welfare scientists, should be reviewed prior to making a submission. The layer Code revision is led by a 17-person Code Development Committee that includes participants from across Canada including producers, animal welfare and enforcement representatives, retailers, researchers, transporters, processors, veterinarians and government representatives. More information on the Code development process is available at The layer Code is one of five Codes of Practice being developed as part of a multi-year NFACC project. Codes of Practice serve as our national understanding of animal care requirements and recommended practices. It is important that Codes be scientifically informed, implementable by producers, and reflect societal expectations for responsible farm animal care. The Codes cover housing, feed and water, handling, euthanasia, transport and other important management practices. In a release today, the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies (CFHS) indicated that the timeline for ending the use of conventional cages has been accelerated, ending five years earlier than indicated by the Egg Farmers of Canada.  Funding for this project has been provided through the AgriMarketing Program under Growing Forward 2, a federal–provincial–territorial initiative.  
August 11, 2016 - The Canadian Centre for Food Integrity, in partnership with The Center for Food Integrity in the US (CFI), convened an Animal Care Review Panel to analyze an undercover animal rights group video about an egg farm that was released on July 21, 2016.  The panel was comprised of an ethicist, an animal care specialist and a veterinarian. A report of their findings was released by the Canadian CFI on July 22, and distributed directly to select media, egg industry groups and companies, food retail and food service associations. Review the report from the panel here. Hidden camera investigations have heightened public attention on animal care issues. In an effort to foster a more balanced conversation and to provide credible feedback to promote continuous improvement in farm animal care, CFI created the Animal Care Review Panel process.  The Panel operates independently, and Its reports are not submitted to the industry for review or approval. CCFI's role is to facilitate the review process and release the panel's findings.  For more information about the Animal Care Review Panel, contact Canadian CFI: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
June 24, 2016 - The United Egg Producers announced last week that they are commited to ending the practice of male chick culling in the next four years.  Canadian technology developed by Michael Ngadi, a professor of bioresource engineering at McGill University, to develop a machine that selects female eggs before they're hatched may help. READ MORE 
It’s an amazing thing to be a part of an initiative that’s already making a significant difference, to be able to help take it to the next level and make further progress. That’s what Egg Farmers of Canada (EFC) is achieving, having spearheaded and funded the addition of an egg farm to “Project Canaan,” a sustainable farming and economic development initiative in Swaziland, Africa. Project Canaan was started by an Ontario couple in 2009 under their charity “Heart for Africa.” Although Janine and Ian Maxwell had no farming background, they enlisted the help of  experienced folks and turned 2,500 acres of empty land into a thriving mixed farm and rural community. The site boasts dairy cow and goat operations, along with cultivation of fruit, vegetables and cash crops and creation of hand-made items. The farm feeds the 86 orphans who make a home there, the 220 local employees and thousands of people through local church-sponsored food programs. The egg farm is the next step in making the charity’s farm, orphanage, schools, women’s shelter and medical clinic self-sustaining by 2020. EFC’s involvementEFC has long been involved in food assistance programs around the world, for example, sending over 16 metric tonnes of egg powder per year to feed children in developing countries over the last 20+ years. In 2014, the International Egg Commission (IEC) brought various independent charitable actions being taken by IEC members (such as EFC) into a cohesive strategy, forming the International Egg Foundation. It now works with the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Health Organization and other groups. For the Project Canaan egg farm, the fundraising, expertise and training is being provided by EFC, and the IEC is providing supports such as the technical services of Ontario poultry vet (and IEC scientific advisor) Dr. Vincent Guyonnet.   EFC chair Peter Clarke has visited Project Canaan several times, most recently in December 2015. He’s been involved from the start, ever since Janine presented the project to the IEC many years ago. He and others looked into the initiative in detail, were satisfied with its legitimacy, and presented it to the EFC board. There was unanimous support, and a project team then was formed to make egg production on the farm a reality. “We put the call out to our industry last year, and our partners and Canadians responded with compassion and generosity,” says EFC CEO Tim Lambert. “Much of the funding for the project was the result of donations and in-kind contributions. The outcome of this collective effort yielded truly amazing results - more than $700,000 has been raised to date to support the construction of the operation and help with operating costs. We remain committed to fundraising to support the ongoing costs of operating the farm until it reaches self-sufficiency.” The layer operation at Project Canaan welcomed its first flock of 2,500 hens in January and a second flock of 2,500 will arrive in July. The design of the two barns had to account for the extreme heat the country is exposed to. “The buildings are higher than normal,” Clarke explains, “so that the heat rises and goes out the vents, and there are also fans that help with that. The buildings are also open-sided, with curtains that can be opened or closed to let the breeze blow through. The birds are doing extremely well.” The two-tier Big Dutchman cage system that was chosen is made for remote areas and has a simple design so it can be operated with little or no electricity, Lambert explains. “Feeding, egg collection and manure removal is carried out manually,” he says. “More staff will be hired to manage and operate the farm over time. This fits Heart for Africa’s philosophy that providing employment creates a ripple effect within the community.” In addition to EFC board members, several other Canadian egg farmers have volunteered to work hand-in-hand with local Swazis to share knowledge and build an understanding of best practices. “This has become a unique opportunity for some of the young leaders in our industry,” Lambert notes. “New Brunswick egg farmer Aaron Law spent much of January in Swaziland, followed by Ontarians Isaac Pelissero in February, and Megan Veldman and Lydia DeWeerd in March. All of these young people have shown a tremendous amount of leadership and compassion, and we are very proud that they stepped up to share their expertise.” EFC intends to implement the Project Canaan model in other areas of Swaziland as well as other African countries. “It is part of our belief that the egg can and will play a major role in the world’s approach to hunger and malnutrition, helping children and families in developing countries where diets are deficient in protein,” Lambert says. What stood out for Clarke on his visit was the impressive agricultural expertise that exists in Swaziland. He notes the team made a connection with a large poultry operation nearby to deliver both pullets and feed. They are currently working with a local nutritionist and veterinarian as well. For Clarke, motivation to be involved in Project Canaan is all about the huge difference it is making. “From hearing Janine’s presentation to our board, getting support from producers coast-to-coast and then going there and seeing what they’re doing with orphans, seeing the connection with 30 churches in the outlying areas and knowing just how fantastic a source of protein is an egg to a child or to any individual, it makes you want to buy in and be a part of something that can make that much of a difference,” he says. “You see the results.” Roger Pelissero, EFC director from Ontario and father to Isaac, is another Project Canaan team member. When he visited in fall of 2014, he and others also went to Mozambique to visit the “Eggs for Africa” project there, where he says they gathered a lot of valuable information. What impresses Pelissero most about the whole project is the dedication of Janine and Ian Maxwell, whom Pelissero says started this humanitarian work in a search for meaning after 9/11 happened. “They’ve made a total change in their lives and it’s quite a commitment,” he says. “They know they can’t change the whole world, but they can made a difference in some children’s lives and they are doing that.”
May 9, 2016 - Grand Island, Nebraska is traditionally associated with cattle farming but a landmark investment by the Netherlands based, genetics company, Hendrix Genetics is set to put egg production firmly on the map. On May 4, Grand Island community leaders and representatives from Hendrix gathered to “break dirt” on a state of the art chicken hatchery that will become the focal point for egg producers in that part of the U.S. Capable of hatching 24 million egg laying chickens per year the facility will create up to 50 new jobs in the area.  “It’s near many of our customers, and a customer base that we’re trying to grow right now, so there’s a lot of farms in the Midwest and this will be able to supply chicks for those farms,” says Hendrix Genetics Managing Director Peter Mumm. The new hatchery alone represents an investment of $10 million and will create the need for a further 11 breeding barns at local farms, all within a 100-mile radius of Grand Island, to supply hatching eggs to the new hatchery. The first flocks of egg layers will leave the hatchery as early as next year.   
  As an industry pioneer tackling the issue of sustainability at the producer level, the Egg Farmers of Alberta (EFA) started on their journey of developing a sustainability platform for egg production farms in 2014. The development of the strategy looked like a familiar three-legged stool: stakeholder engagement, to open a dialogue so that the players understood each others’ views and values; accountability and transparency by measuring and monitoring progress; and integrating the PEEP (Producer Environmental Egg Plan) program with current work and processes. The EFA sustainability platform was created with the consumer in mind but the target audience is all value chain partners, from government to special interest groups, to inform them about egg production at the farm level and to engage them as they pursue their own sustainability goals. “If our value chain partners want farmers to educate the public, we can help,” said Jenna Griffin, industry development officer for the EFA. The sustainability platform was distilled down from seven key areas to a simplified four pillars: Healthy Birds, Healthy Eggs, Healthy Farms, and Healthy Communities. This has allowed them to engage farmers, making it easier to understand how their day-to-day practices can help to achieve sustainability goals. EFA released their first sustainability report, outlining some statistics and metrics, in 2015.   As Griffin explained to the audience at the 2nd Annual Canadian Poultry Sustainability Symposium in London, Ont., the sustainability platform will join other EFA on-farm programs that include PEEP, Start Clean Stay Clean, and the Animal Care Program. Sixty per cent of the producers in Alberta enrolled in the sustainability program in 2014, increasing to 68 per cent in 2015. Of those, 11 producers switched from incandescent lighting, reducing their carbon footprint by the equivalent amount of 158,000 km not driven or 41,372.06 kg of CO2. That’s the type of change that can be monitored through the program over time. Along the way EFA is learning how to better ask the questions and which questions to ask. For example, changing the wording on a question about manure management raised the average score from four to five, without actually reflecting changes to the practice itself. We needed to ask what we were really after, admitted Griffin. In 2016 there will be more questions added as the program evolves, such as energy usage for cooler systems, and more emphasis on wash water effluent management. Griffin’s first piece of advice for other provinces, in order to make engagement in sustainability programs attractive, would be to speak in a language that matters to farmers. What does a ‘carbon footprint’ actually mean on a farm? Help farmers to understand what that means in terms of kWh of energy, for example, and how that can pencil out. She also suggested engaging and training farmers to be ambassadors. When farmers can see their goals are being met, they can take ownership of that and share their own story. One of the original intents was to start discussion, to start dialogue among all stakeholders, creating a “coalition of the willing”, said Griffin. For Egg Farmers of Alberta, she acknowledged that there is still a lot of work to do, everything from opening up that dialogue through webinars and workshops, to dealing with setting goals for production practices such as beak trimming (Where are we at? Where do we need to be?). So far, the discussion has been hard to contain. Egg Farmers of Alberta was the recipient of the 2015 Canadian Poultry Sustainability Award for their leadership and achievements in sustainability programming.      
  David Brock never thought he would be a chicken farmer. After finishing school and working as an agriculture representative for several years, he fulfilled his dream of owning 1,000 acres and raising pigs in Staffa, Ont. But 20 years later, and with two sons interested in farming, David was looking towards providing income stability for multiple families and used his astute business skills to analyze the poultry industry. In September of 1997 he purchased Maple Leaf Food’s corporate broiler breeder operations in nearby Monkton and Palmerston and incorporated Four Corners Poultry. With the purchase came more than 20 employees and out-of-date facilities. Overwhelmed, he brought on board his son Jamie (then only 21 years old), who used his organizational skills to get the farm on track and assist with employee and labour issues. Son Mark, having a great interest in crops and technology, managed the family’s land base in Staffa, began a progressive cropping operation and slowly set about incorporating manure from the breeder operation. As production manager Don Haasnoot told Canadian Poultry, David is a “strategic, forward-thinking” owner and his vision was to bring the breeder operation back to the Staffa land base. David admits he spends a long time thinking about how the future should be shaped and says business owners need to realize that “big changes can’t be made all at once, they must be calculated.” He’s used this philosophy over the past 14 years to slowly build new production barns at the Staffa site while ensuring the farm is financially viable, and most importantly, sustainable. Understanding that energy costs will continue to rise, David has ensured the new facilities take advantage of the latest technology and efficiencies. Four Corners now grows its own pullets and boasts a smaller spiker facility built to provide an internal supply of males and enhance biosecurity. The family also invested in having a natural gas line extended to the Staffa site to eliminate propane use and the biosecurity risk of propane trucks travelling to the farm. Natural gas, now used to fuel a corn dryer, run several farm service vehicles and heat the barns, has saved the operation 35 per cent in energy costs. Because the area in which their farm is situated is rather unique, having sinkholes (open cracks in the bedrock that allow surface drainage to enter the underground aquifer), the Brocks are “very conscious” of environmental responsibility. Although it’s unknown whether the aquifer is the one that supplies drinking water for the area, and they work with the Ausable-Bayfield Conservation Authority on monitoring and have a test well on the property. Wash-down and clean-out procedures have been enhanced to reduce water use and every facility has very large grass buffer strips to absorb runoff. Long before the poultry operation was a consideration, David had purchased 50 acres of woodlot and created tree shelterbelts on the crop land to prevent erosion. The land is systematically tiled to prevent flooding and reduce runoff and Mark utilizes GPS and historical farm data to ensure that manure spreading is effective and has minimized or eliminated the use of potash and nitrogen inputs. To reduce disease risk and increase biosecurity, Jamie not only developed new washout procedures but also implemented the use of a Biovator (he now sells them) to render deadstock and cull eggs. These strategies helped reduce the hazards associated with visiting multiple sites. He also implemented the use of manure sheds at the Staffa and Monkton sites. Since becoming a self-grower, Four Corners Poultry has been Salmonella-free and works continually to maintain this status. Along with an intensive cleaning/disinfection program and attention to flock husbandry, rodent and fly control are key areas.   Although “we couldn’t afford it at the time,” Jamie says, the operation began employing rodent services several years ago and has recently begun using parasitic wasps instead of chemicals to control flies to further reduce Salmonella risk. As a grower for Cargill’s, the supplier to McDonald’s restaurants, the Brock family is keenly aware of consumer food safety concerns. They strive to practise antibiotic-free management, which is achieved through a Coccidiosis vaccination program and careful attention to brooding management, particularly on litter moisture levels in the first two weeks of placement. Blood testing by hatchery technicians and environmental swabbing pre-placement further guide brooding management. As an employer of 20 full-time staff, Four Corners takes health and safety and training seriously, providing ongoing training and modern personal protective  equipment (including respirators). David has been a board director for the Ontario Broiler Hatching Egg and Chick Commission (OBHECC) for the past six years and was heavily involved with OBHECC’s revamped cost-of-production formula, a strategy established so that the industry “doesn’t become stale” and income stability for producers is maintained. Now that the farm is nearly where he and his family want it to be, he says “we can do even more sustainability projects.”      
October 30, 2014 - Cody Polley has been appointed as breeder specialist with the Cobb World Technical Support Team.  Polley has wide wide experience of managing pedigree and grandparent farms for Cobb-Vantress, and is a graduate of the University of Arkansas.  After graduation he worked in turkey production and then joined Cobb in 1998, and within two years became breeder manager at one of company’s pedigree farms.   He progressed to managing the Cobb pedigree complex at Grand Meadows in Oklahoma and went on to manage other pedigree complexes in Kentucky and most recently Three Springs in Oklahoma.  He also spent two years as grandparent production manager in Kentucky responsible for 38 contract producers in four of the state counties. “We are excited to have Cody join our World Technical Support Team,” said Dr Steve Bolden, Director of the team.  “Our customers in the Asia/Pacific region will value his extensive knowledge as he assists them in getting the most genetic potential from our products.”    
The continually increasing growth rate of modern broilers allows each new generation to reach market weight approximately half-a-day faster each year.1  Despite changes in the rate of growth of broiler stocks, the target growth profiles used in broiler breeder feed restriction programs have changed little in past 30 years.2 As the growth potential of broilers continues to increase, the degree of feed restriction required to manage parent stock body weight gains has created a more competitive feeding environment. Whereas the poultry breeding companies have worked to maintain or even increase rates of egg production and hatchability, achieving these potential results at the broiler breeder farm level on a consistent has been challenging.3 Production of viable chicks ultimately defines success in a broiler breeder operation. Strategic use of feed ingredients and effective feed delivery contribute heavily to this success. The hen diet can be changed in ways that increase embryo viability, support development of the immune system, and at times even influence broiler yield. As these effects can change with hen age, it is important to understand some of the more influential maternal nutritional effects on the broiler offspring. The nutrient composition of the egg is affected by maternal nutrition, body composition, age and strain. These traits, as well as incubation conditions, can affect chick well-being, growth, and immune function. This paper examines some of the key attributes of maternal nutrition and management that can affect broiler chick quality and growth. Selecting for Growth Affects Body CompositionFrom the perspective of parent stock managers, modern broiler strains are simply too good at depositing breast muscle. With a propensity to deposit muscle rather than fat, there may not be enough energy stored in the body to mobilize in times of energetic shortage, and as a result broiler breeder hens may have difficulty with early chick quality and long-term maintenance of lay. Carcass fat in feed restricted birds at sexual maturity averages between 12.5 and 15 per cent of their body weight and has been trending downwards.4,5 Apparent reductions in fat content in current stocks are likely a reflection of the increased muscling that has occurred. How do we grow the bird at an appropriate rate while ensuring the carcass stores are present to support long-term egg production without letting egg size get out of hand? The bird used to be a lot more forgiving. The use of non-traditional feed allocation profiles has shown the large impact of current feeding level on ovarian morphology parameters. Current feeding level can be more important than body weight in its influence on egg production. Thus, there is potential to use feed to manipulate body composition to optimize egg and chick production. Managing Lifetime NutritionBy the time sexual maturation begins, managing nutrient intake of the bird is a combination of current feeding level within the context of previous feed allocation decisions. Because current broiler breeder stocks are less able to store fat and grow more muscle when overfed, what the bird consumes today has a much greater impact on productivity than it used to. There is less of a buffering effect from fat stores, and the bird must rely more on protein stores and on dietary nutrients. If the energy needs of the birds have been met today, the right signals proceed between the gut, the brain, and the reproductive organs to maintain a high rate of productivity. When too much is fed, additional nutrients are first shunted towards growth. When not enough is fed, cuts to reproduction now tend to be first on the list. In previous trials we have noted that at the end of lay (approximately 60 wk of age) there is less fat and ovary mass in birds carrying a higher proportion of breast muscle. However, while examining this relationship more closely in a recent study, we noted that while breast muscle weight was negatively correlated with abdominal fatpad weight (r = -0.735; P < 0.0001), neither were correlated with ovary weight (Renema, unpublished data). In this study comparing various dietary energy:protein ratios, we found that birds were able to shift the balance  from skeletal muscle to egg production to some extent. While the hen can use both carcass fat and protein as energy sources, the metabolic priority is to maintain protein, and hens will catabolize their own muscle tissue only as a last resort.  A bird with more carcass fat is better equipped to tolerate day-to-day changes in feed availability. Ekmay et al. (2010) worked with isotope-labeled lysine and found that while early in lay there is a high reliance on skeletal muscle turnover for egg formation, later in lay the reliance on dietary protein increases. In contrast, fat to support yolk formation comes primarily from lipid synthesis early in lay, but shifts to a more even division between lipid synthesis, dietary lipids and tissue fat later in lay.6 Support of the ovary appeared to be more closely tied to dietary energy level during the laying phase, with both ovary and liver weights being higher when a higher energy ration was fed (Renema, unpublished data). A bird with more carcass fat could be better equipped to tolerate day-to-day changes in feed availability. In the broiler breeder research program at the University of Alberta we have recently confirmed that feeding in the pullet phase has a more long-term effect on productivity than previously thought. Basically, feeding program, feed restriction program, and how we follow the body weight targets in the growing phase all have a greater affect on final carcass composition at the end of egg production than the diets fed during the egg production period have. This is partly because muscle deposition is ‘set’ when they are young and frame size is ‘set’ as soon as the reproductive hormones begin to increase during sexual maturation, and these both have carry-over effect into the breeder phase. In addition, we have found that the change in energy:protein ratio during the transition between rearing and breeding phase can also affect long-term breeding success. It is possible to hurt long-term egg production and even broiler offspring yield based on choice of pullet and layer diets. Moraes et al. (University of Alberta, unpublished data), reported that if the energy:protein ratio decreased between the rearing and breeding phases, broiler offspring yield was negatively affected. As an example, moving from a higher energy ration in the rearing period to a lower energy ration during the breeder period, which results in a drop in the energy to protein ratio, also hurts broiler offspring breast muscle yield and overall carcass yield by approximately 1% (19.8% vs. 20.9% breast muscle) when compared to treatments where the energy:protein ratio remained the same or increased between the rearing and breeder diets (Moraes, unpublished data). The bottom line recommendation is not to overfeed protein when transitioning from rearing to lay. Low protein in the layer ration may affect gene expression related to breast muscle development in the offspring. This is known as an epigenetic effect. Rao et al. (2009) reported that offspring of Langshan breeders fed 10% vs. 15% CP diets had heavier breast muscle by 4 wk of age. Offspring of the 10% CP hens had an up-regulated expression of insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-I) and type 1 insulin-like growth factor receptor (IGF-IR) mRNA in the breast muscle. IGF-I is a regulator of bird metabolism and muscle development and increased expression of IGF-I will result in increased breast muscle.8 Our observation that pullet phase nutrition had more influence on broiler offspring than the nutrition during the laying phase (Moraes, unpublished) supports the idea that there may be an epigenetic effect. Who Benefits from High Flock Uniformity?Good body weight uniformity in the pullet flock is one of the ways we can increase the predictability of the response of the pullet flock to both photostimulation and the slightly more aggressive feed changes associated with the sexual maturation period. While not perfect due to the existence of plenty of bird:bird variability in feed intake and growth patterns, uniformity can help to ensure we are over- or under-feeding as few birds as possible as egg production starts and subsequently when post-peak feed reductions are imposed. The bird:bird weight variability can have a behavioural component, with some birds eating more aggressively than others, and an energetic efficiency component. Small birds in particular are often found to be less energetically efficient. Less efficient hens have a higher regulatory thermogenesis, resulting in the loss of more energy as heat.9 If these less efficient birds also get behind in body weight compared to their flock-mates, they will often also mature later, and with less robust ovarian development than their larger flock-mates. What happens to the ovary development and egg production traits of the outlier pullets if their growth profile is allowed to continue in parallel to the target flock body weight curve? To test this we randomly divided pullets from all over the flock body weight distribution onto BW target profiles either at target or 150 g above or below target. For the offspring, the biggest impact of modifying BW targets was with egg size and subsequent chick size. No egg production traits were affected and all broiler trait differences could be explained by the treatment affects on egg size (Renema, unpublished data). A common assumption regarding flock body weight management is that productivity will be maximized if body weight uniformity is high – with the ideal case being that all birds had the exact same body weight. To test this, we maintained a group of broiler breeder pullets on a common feed allocation, or individually managed birds from 16 wk of age to all be at the target body weight. Body weights of individually managed birds had a very good uniformity (CV=1.9%) from 20 to 60 wk of age compared to the group-fed birds (CV=5.4%). With the larger birds, egg size will be an issue. Decreasing body weight of heavier pullets from 16 wk to reach the target weight did not significantly affect their egg production. However, a very pronounced effect was found when underweight pullets were forced to the target. These birds produced as much 15 total eggs more than control underweight hens (Figure 1). The problem, for Canadians at least, was that 11 of these 15 eggs were lighter than 52 g – the threshold for incubation. It is clear that improving the body weight profile of underweight birds have the potential to significantly improve broiler breeder productivity.   Figure 1. Total egg production of hens of a High, Standard, or Low initial BW (at 16 wk of age) following a standard, group feed allocation or individual feed allocations to hold each bird right on the flock BW target. Only Low birds were significantly affected by the feeding treatment, with the additional feed provided to the Low-Individual birds triggering increased egg production. The increased egg production results for the low efficiency birds fits with hormone profile work of underweight pullets during sexual maturation. In this work, pullets beginning 20% lighter than the flock mean will mature more slowly than standard pullets or 20% heavy pullets unless they are given a 20% boost in their feed allocation. Plasma estradiol-17b concentrations demonstrated that ovary development in the overfed small pullets was proceeding like that of their standard and high weight counterparts. Feeding the entire flock at a higher level would result in overfeeding in the Standard and High weight birds.10 At some point the practice of sorting small birds into a separate area and feeding them either without competition from larger birds or possibly at a higher level may become cost-effective to consider. From a management perspective, correcting the body weight profile of higher weight birds has no impact on flock productivity while correcting the weight of the underweight pullets did have a positive impact on overall productivity -- provided the mean body weight of the population is under control, i.e. close to the body weight target. To truly see the impact of a tight uniformity, a treatment like this should be started at a much younger age to eliminate biases that might be introduced by early growth profile. Careful attention to feeder space and even initiating a sorting program during the pullet phase can help generate a group of birds with uniform BW going into the breeder house. With females maturing within a shorter age range today, there may be fewer issues with male intimidation of females that are not yet receptive to mating. This can contribute to a more stable, long-term sexual behavior in the flock. A flock that has high body weight uniformity values coming into lay may not continue this way. Within a hen population some hens lose weight in time – often as a result of a high rate of lay, while some gain weight due to a poor rate of lay. However, other groups exist within the population that can both gain weight and produce large numbers of eggs, or do the opposite (Renema and Zuidhof, unpublished data). As a result, the average weight birds at the end of lay include the best layers of the most energetically efficient birds (lost weight), the worst layers of the least energetically efficient birds (gained weight), and the average layers of the average efficiency birds (remained average weight throughout). As a result of this variability, later in the egg production period it is much easier to interpret the relationship between male size, appearance and reproductive effectiveness than it is for the females. How has Genetic Change Impacted Flock Management?Egg Size: Genetic selection programs in table egg stocks compared to broiler stocks have affected reproductive traits differently. In laying hens, earlier maturation and higher rates of lay have led to potential skeletal issues due to the challenge of maintaining support for shell formation. While increasing egg size with age is an issue in both laying and broiler breeder stocks, in table egg production this is much easier to manage using nutritional tools. Unfortunately in broiler breeders, once you move beyond methionine and start reducing various combinations of choline, folic acid, and vitamin B12 that can work well in laying hens), you are reducing micro-ingredients essential for broiler hatchability.11 A general uneasiness to commit to a defined post-peak feed withdrawal program in broiler breeder flocks could be largely responsible for current issues with large egg size in older broiler breeder flocks. Issues with late egg weight within the breeding companies may not be the same as what is faced on commercial farms. Under conditions of overfeeding, egg weight was much more responsive in commercial strain crosses than in pure lines (Figure 2).   Figure 2. Egg weight of pure lines (1 to 4) or of commercial and experimental strain crosses (5 to 8) fed a standard ration (R) or overfed 20% from placement in the layer barn (OF) The egg can be affected very quickly by fluctuations in feed intake. There is a short term effect of changes to feeding level on egg size, for example. The albumen content reacts to changes in energy intake immediately, while yolk size is slower to respond. Unfortunately, the yolk tends to only trend upwards in size. A reduction in rate of lay means the hen has more yolk material available to spread across fewer yolks, thereby increasing egg size. As a result, the most effective approach to controlling egg size is still to maintain as high as possible a rate of lay later in production. In contrast to table egg laying hens, broiler breeder hens lay at a lower rate and have a higher body mass – both of which contribute to less stress on calcium supplied by the diet or skeleton. The shell quality issues that have appeared in some flocks after 40 to 45 wk of age can typically be easily remedied by the supply of some large particle calcium. There may be a feed formulation or diet density trigger in flocks where shell issues appear. We have recently begun to see examples of shell quality issues confined to specific feeding treatments with no obvious reason for the shell quality differences among groups. Can feed restriction be relaxed and birds allowed a less restrictive growth profile? In a comparison of a range of both pure lines and commercial lines, providing 20% extra feed reduced productivity and shell quality (Table 1). On average, egg production was reduced by 12.5 eggs (8.3%) under these conditions. This is in contrast to underfed birds, which we have shown will cease egg production all together with just a 9% drop in feed allocation (86% vs. 63% of birds still in production at 65 wk in Control and -9% groups) (Renema, unpublished). In time of energetic stress, reproduction is one of the first things the bird will sacrifice – instead diverting nutrients to maintenance and survival.   A flock can transition from being on the target body weight profile to overweight over just a few weeks time – often as the birds reach peak production and ‘overshoot’ the weight targets. As the birds are transitioned from feed increases during sexual maturation to post-peak feed decreases, they grow more energetically efficient. This same phenomenon occurs during the transition onto feed restriction from full feeding in the first few weeks after breeder chick placement. As these hens are able to utilize the feed more efficiently in the short term, the initial feed withdrawals may not be as effective as hoped, leading to the hens getting too heavy.     In warm environments, overweight birds can be the result of not compensating for the higher barn temperature with a lower feed allocation. As long as the feed is formulated to ensure adequate supply of the micro-ingredients on a daily basis, focusing on a body weight target rather than a feeding program can help ensure body weight does not become excessive. Lighting: The majority of research on daylength and light intensity has occurred in laying hens.  At current commercial light intensity levels, we have not been able to demonstrate any significant effects on reproductive traits. Concerns with high light intensity in broiler breeder barns has so far proven to be of little consequence. However, the results we have seen demonstrate that ovary development is affected in extreme cases (particularly low light intensity), demonstrating that these effects should continue to be monitored. New LED lighting systems have the potential to be produced with very specific blends of light wavelengths. New lights are being produced that have claims of encouraging more efficient growth, for example. This is presumably achieved in part through behavioral modification, as evidenced by anecdotal reports of ‘calmer flocks’. Some red light will always be necessary to support reproduction since these wavelength have the greatest ability to penetrate through the feathers and skull to the light-sensitive neurons associated with gonadotrophin producing neurons. Too much red light has anecdotally been shown to cause undesirable behaviour aviary-housed laying hens, demonstrating it is important to work with companies familiar with how their products have been tested in agricultural environments. Fertility: Assessing flock fertility comes down to one main theme – if you don’t have mating, you won’t get fertile eggs. A good female flock can come out just average for chick production if the males have been ineffectively managed.  While there are some nutritional components to male fertility (antioxidants and minerals like Zinc, Choline and Selenium that contribute to both sperm production and sperm survival in the female reproductive tract), reproductive behavior of the flock must be managed appropriately to maintain long-term flock fertility. Heavy birds are an issue, as it can impact physical traits such as footpad condition and cause pain. If the male is sore, the last thing it wants to do is mate, and if it is mating it will be much less successful at it. Rapid declines in flock fertility are often due to insufficient bodyweight control. Hocking et al. (2002) reported that feed restricted and overfed hens have similar fertility when provided a similar semen source, but overfed hens have a reduced hatchability due to an increase in late embryonic death. Duration of fertility (measured by monitoring fertility in consecutive eggs) is also reduced under conditions of overfeeding.13 Nutritionally, too much protein is bad for yolk membrane strength and embryo survival. Underfeeding hens, while being potentially detrimental to rate of lay, does not appear to hurt fertility or hatchability. Many aspects of mating and dominance behavior cross the boundaries of breed. We can learn a lot from table egg laying hens reproduction and even from wild poultry species. Female preferences for dominant males can be problematic in flocks with heavy males. Modern broiler stocks have been selected for a shorter, wider-legged stance to support rapid broiler growth. In the breeder, shifts in body conformation have the potential to affect how well the male and female are able to make sexual contact during the act of mating in heavy flocks. The behaviour of these birds suggests they think it was a completed mating when no semen transfer occurred. As this likely affects mostly older, heavily muscled males, this could become a criterion for male culling. Unlike underweight males who may express less sexual behavior due to decreased testicular mass and testosterone production, these large males are often still perfectly functional, and only serve to disrupt mating activity of subordinate males. Flock fertility results don’t show which males are working and which ones are lame, too big, or just sore enough in the feet and leg joints to not want to bother to mate. Managing flock fertility requires spending time observing flock mating activity and assessing all males for potential culling. The best males in the younger flock could be the ones causing the most trouble in the older flock if they are not able to complete matings. ConclusionsThe broiler breeder of tomorrow will require a higher degree of precision in its feeding. Increasing vigilance is needed in the areas of feed composition and maintaining consistent body weight gains through careful decisions about how much and how often to change feed allocations. Extra attention to detail can make it possible to change body weight targets, but make sure the intended consequences actually do occur rather than negative unintended consequences. Effective management of these flocks needs to ensure managers are able to deliver the right nutrition to the bird WHEN they need it. Using this approach can enhance late egg production, control egg size and contribute to improved embryo survival and even broiler yield traits. The ability to think of daily nutritional decisions in a broiler breeder operation within the context of the entire life history of the flock will become a more important aspect of broiler breeder management and feeding. References 1. Havenstein, G. B., Ferket, P. R., and Qureshi, M. A. (2003). Poultry Science 82:1500-1508. 2. Renema, R. A., Rustad, M. E. and Robinson, F. E. (2007a). World’s Poultry Science Journal 63:457-472. 3. Laughlin, K. F. 2009. ‘Breeder management: How did we get here?’ pp 10—25 in: Biology of Breeding Poultry. Poultry Science Series Vol. 29. P. M. Hocking ed. CABI. Wallingford 4. Renema, R. A.,  Robinson, F. E. and Zuidhof, M. J. (2007b). Poultry Science, 86: 2267-2277. 5. Yu, M.W., Robinson, F.E., Charles, R.G. and Weingardt, R. (1992b). Poultry Science, 71: 1750-1761. 6. Ekmay, R. D., Salas, C., England, J., and Coon, C. N. (2010). Poultry Science 88(Suppl 1): 84.   7. Rao, K., J. Xie, X. Yang, L. Chen, R. Grossmann, and R. Zhao. 2009. British Journal of Nutritions, 102:848-857. 8. Duclos, M. J. 2005. Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology,  56:25-35 (Suppl. 3). 9. Gabarrou, J.F., Geraert, P.A., Francois, N., Guillaumin, S., Picard M. and Bordas, A. (1998). British Poultry Science, 39: 79-89. 10. Renema, R. A., and Robinson, F. E. (2004). World’s Poultry Science Journal, 60: 511-525. Goerzen, P. R., Julsrud, W. L., and Robinson, F. E. (1996). Poultry Science 75:962-965. 11 Keshavarz, K. (2003). Poultry Scien 82:1407-1414 12. Hocking, P. M., Bernard, R., and Robertson, G. W. (2002). British Poultry Science 43:94-103.
 13. Goerzen, P.R., Julsrud, W.L., and Robinson F.E. (1996). Poultry Science 75:962-965
Dec. 17, 2013, Washington, DC - The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) has released its Salmonella Action Plan that outlines the steps it will take to address the most pressing problem it faces - Salmonella in meat and poultry products. An estimated 1.3 million illnesses can be attributed to Salmonella every year. “Far too many Americans are sickened by Salmonella every year. The aggressive and comprehensive steps detailed in the Salmonella Action Plan will protect consumers by making meat and poultry products safer.” said the under secretary for food safety, Elisabeth Hagen. The Salmonella Action Plan is the agency’s strategy to best address the threat of Salmonella in meat and poultry products. The plan identifies modernizing the outdated poultry slaughter inspection system as a top priority. By focusing inspectors’ duties solely on food safety, at least 5,000 illnesses can be prevented each year.   Enhancing Salmonella sampling and testing programs is also part of this comprehensive effort,  ensuring that these programs factor in the latest scientific information available and account for emerging trends in foodborne illness. Inspectors will also be empowered with the tools necessary to expeditiously pinpoint problems. With more information about a plant’s performance history and with better methods for assessing in-plant conditions, inspectors will be better positioned to detect Salmonella earlier, before it can cause an outbreak. In addition, the plan outlines several actions FSIS will take to drive innovations that will lower Salmonella contamination rates, including establishing new performance standards; developing new strategies for inspection and throughout the full farm-to-table continuum; addressing all potential sources of Salmonella; and focusing the Agency’s education and outreach tools on Salmonella. These efforts will build upon the work that USDA has done over the past several years. In 2011, USDA strengthened the performance standards for Salmonella in poultry with a goal of significantly reducing illnesses by 20,000 per year.  And through the Salmonella Initiative Program, plants are now using processing techniques designed to directly reduce Salmonella in raw meat and poultry.  Thanks to these innovative technologies and tough policies, Salmonella rates in young chickens have dropped over 75 percent since 2006. For more information about the new Salmonella Action Plan, visit
Sept. 17, 2013, Guelph, ON - Farm Credit Canada (FCC) will provide $260,000 through the FCC AgriSpirit Fund to 26 community groups in Ontario to support capital projects that will help improve quality of life for rural residents. Over the past 10 years, AgriSpirit has helped to fund 787 rural community projects across Canada."At FCC we believe in giving back to the communities we serve. Congratulations to this year's recipients. We look forward to seeing the successful completion of these projects," says Barry Smith, FCC Vice-President, Western Ontario Operations.The FCC AgriSpirit Fund awards rural community groups between $5,000 and $25,000 for community improvement projects such as recreation and community centres, libraries, and emergency services training facilities. All projects are based in communities with populations lower than 150,000.Selected groups must complete their projects by December 31, 2015.Nationally, 866 applications were received for FCC AgriSpirit funding this year – a clear indication that rural Canadians are passionate about their communities. Over the past 10 years, more than $7.5 million in funding has been given to AgriSpirit projects in rural communities across Canada.Next year's application period runs from will open in spring 2014. Registered charities and non-profit organizations interested in funding this year are encouraged to visit for more information, including eligibility requirements and to apply online.
Mar. 19, 2013, Ottawa, ON - Competitors from across Canada will have the opportunity to win a trip of a lifetime to attend the International Farm Management Congress in Poland July 2013, all expenses paid, to learn international agricultural management best practices and be part of the Canadian delegation. "We know first-hand that being part of IFMA (International Farm Management Association) is a life-changing experience," says Heather Watson, FMC Executive Director "and we are thrilled to have the opportunity to offer this experience to fellow Canadians and help build the Canadian delegation in Poland." To enter this amazing contest, contestants must produce a video, one minute or less, that demonstrates: Canadian Farmers Managing for Success! Farm Management Canada must receive the completed application form and video submission no later than May 24th, 2013. The names of the winners will be announced in June 2013. The selected winners will win an all-expenses paid trip to attend the International Farm Management Congress in Poland this summer. While in Poland, winners will report from the Congress by being active on Twitter. Upon return, the winner is required to write two articles to share insights on their experience and entice participation for IFMA 2015 in Canada. Winners may also be called upon to speak at FMC and industry events. FMC and generous sponsors have partnered to be able to run this competition and provide Canadian farmers with this unique opportunity. FMC wishes to thank our first confirmed sponsor, FBC for their generous involvement in the contest and encourage many more to come on board. For more information regarding how to apply and full contest rules, please visit About the International Farm Management Congress The International Farm Management Congress takes place every second year in locations all over the world. The 2013 Congress is in Poland at Warsaw's University of Life Sciences ( Farmers, advisors, academia, policy makers, researchers, and anyone with a keen interest in farm business management gather to share best practices on the world stage.
September 14, 2016 - Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) has announced an investment of $690,000 to Éleveurs de volailles du Québec (ÉVQ) to help the Quebec poultry industry reduce the preventive use of antibiotics. Under this project, the Poultry Research Chair at the University of Montreal's Faculty of Veterinary Medicine will assess various alternative strategies and their effects on flock performance. The latest research into anti-microbial resistance (AMR) builds on a previous project, also funded by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, and will seek solutions that can be applied across the entire poultry industry. This contribution has been made through the AgriInnovation Program under Growing Forward 2, a five-year, $698 million initiative. AAFC supports the development and adoption of industry-led initiatives regarding biosecurity and animal care to support the prudent use of antimicrobials. Pierre-Luc Leblanc, President, Les Éleveurs de volailles du Québec said in a release “the Quebec poultry industry is committed to developing cutting-edge farming methods while maintaining strict, rigorous animal welfare standards. Flock health and the quality of consumer products are top priorities. Working with the Poultry Research Chair, we are taking the necessary steps to preserve and enhance these priority areas by building on research and development."
In the poultry industry we discuss cost/profit/loss in terms of hundredths of pennies.  Those same pennies in a year equate to millions of dollars.   Properly evaluating any input — such as breed choice, equipment or feed additives -- at the broiler level can only be done with a properly designed commercial broiler trial within your complex. Basing decisions on data collected from another complex or research is only a part of the story.  In many cases it’s the beginning of the story, but can lead you down the wrong path for too long if not tested within your complex using your own system. It might be tempting to follow the path of another complex, but more often than not there are nuances within your complex that will impact the end result.  Most of the time you only have part of the other complex’s success story.  You don’t have the same inputs or outputs. A difference in live operations (inputs) and product mix (outputs) can greatly influence the profit/loss that might be generated by following the same path within your own complex.  You need to write your own story to make the best decisions for your complex.  That story is best told through a commercial trial. The value attached to the decisions made based on the commercial trial results warrant a properly designed, communicated and executed trial.   A properly designed trial takes as many variables out of the equation as possible, except those you are comparing.  For instance if you are testing different breeds, you want to have a farm with: Identical houses in equipment and design Two houses per treatment Same breeder flock ages Same hatchery and set date Same light, ventilation, feed and water programs If there is a variable that could have influenced your data there will always be questions and concerns regarding the validity of the trial.  The reason for at least two houses per treatment is that it allows you to choose one house from each treatment that closely mimics the other treatment in regards to mortality, morbidity and growing conditions.  This takes out more of the variables that may have occurred during the growing cycle.  Some of those variables that have been witnessed during the growing cycle are: running out of feed in one or more houses; environmental conditions; and chick quality It is also recommended to repeat the trial or multiple trials for the same reason, but this is not always practical.  Multiple trials help make the end picture clearer. A properly communicated trial involves including many departments within your complex in a planning discussion weeks in advance.  Having every department on board before the birds are set in the machines will result in the best outcome.  Departments that need to be involved include: breeder department; hatchery; feed mill and delivery; broiler department; live haul; processing plant; and government institutions. Communication about the trial will help minimize one of the biggest variables to a trial -- human error.  Assign a trial point person or persons to follow the trial through the process.  All departments need to take ownership and understand the importance of the trial results. A properly executed trial generates the quality data needed to make the right decision.  Typically the data needed is from live as well as plant performance.  To obtain accurate live data you should select a random sample of birds from one house for each treatment, as discussed previously, the day before processing.   The weight samples should be kept separate by sex, and collected from three areas of the house: Back, Middle and Front.  Either record individual weights, or use scales with the capability to calculate the standard deviation.  Once you have your mean (average) and standard deviation for body weight (by sex), you can fill in the boxes that define the weight category cut-offs on either side of the mean (middle) weight (See image page 22).  You will need to find the appropriate number of males and females for each weight range seen in the histogram below.  In the end, you will have four males and four females that are between 1 and 2 standard deviations below the average weight, eight males and eight females that are between the average weight and 1 standard deviation below the average, etc.. These birds should be tagged and followed the following day to the plant.  At the plant the birds should be reweighed and this individual plant weight will be your live weight.  The birds should then be sent through your processing plant.  This allows for you to see what the treatments will achieve in your operation.  Typically, the carcasses would be removed from the line just before the chiller to take the variable of water uptake out of the equation. The next step is to have a person that is well trained to debone the carcass and to collect the individual parts with the correct bird tag.  Another person will need to record the weight for each individual deboned or whole part for each tag/band number.  The data generated by your complex can then be analyzed. Once you have the results from the well-executed trial, you can start working on the economics to help in your decision.  The economic model should help you answer questions on how the inputs you are testing influenced your bottom line.  These are some of the factors your economic model needs to consider: Will the change result in more/less housing needs? How did the change influence live performance? (FCR, mortality, growth rates How did the change influence processing performance? (Meat quality, yield, condemdation) Will the change result in updating your system? (Hatchery, feed mill, processing plant) Take into account all the departments involved in the trial itself.  Sometimes decisions may result in a positive for one department and a negative for another department.  If you answer how each of those departments will be affected, your goal will have been met - the scenario that results in the most hundredths of pennies for your complex. A link is provided below on how Cobb recommends performing a commercial yield trial:
March 8, 2016 - When you go to a restaurant for an expensive dinner, you expect that you’re going to get exactly what you ordered. But what if the restaurant or its supplier substituted your sword fish for a cheaper product like tilapia and didn’t tell you? The products might be similar in taste and appearance, leaving you misled about what you really paid for. The same problem can exist in poultry. Consumers and importers expecting to purchase fresh chicken raised by Canadian farmers could potentially be deceived into buying meat from older laying hens (called spent fowl) that are a by-product of egg production. While birds called broiler chickens are raised for meat consumption and are the product most frequently found in meat counters, spent hens will also be processed once their egg laying productivity declines. Their meat, which can be tougher and stronger tasting, is used for processed products like soups, patties, nuggets, or deli meats. More seriously, though, meat from spent fowl could pose a risk to someone with a severe allergy to eggs if it was improperly labelled. Broiler meat entering Canada is subject to import controls and tariffs, but those limits don’t exist for spent fowl, resulting in a high potential for deception. And until recently, there hasn’t been a DNA test that could differentiate between the two. It’s a problem believed to reduce the Canadian chicken industry’s contribution to the Canadian economy by an estimated $500 million annually in lost sales, jobs, and GDP contributions. Now there’s a potential solution thanks to a Canadian DNA-based analytical company called Sterisense. Geoff Lumby is the owner and president of Sterisense. Sterisense had already been working on DNA testing of products for grocery stores and restaurants when, in 2012, after meeting with Canadian meat processors, Lumby was asked if he thought a spent fowl test was possible. He embarked on a successful partnership with researchers at the Natural Resources DNA Profiling and Forensics Centre (NRDPFC) at Trent University to do just that. And while the project is still being tested, the results are encouraging. Chicken Farmers of Canada (CFC) and Canadian meat processors have been urging for years that the problem of mislabelled poultry meat should be addressed and are optimistic that this test could be the solution. Lumby, Trent scientists, CFC and other industry representatives have met with federal government representatives to demonstrate their findings and are now working toward a deeper validation of the testing. That will include working with legitimate American companies on blind samplings to ensure that the test accurately and reliably distinguishes between the two types of meat. Yves Ruel is CFC’s Manager of Trade and Policy and says that the next challenge will be to determine how the testing is implemented. “It’s a technology that both the industry and consumers are really interested in,” adds Lumby. “The tests will remove all risks of buying fraudulent product and give consumers added reassurance that what they’re paying for is what they’re getting.”
Water management is one of the most crucial components in a top-performing broiler flock.  Broilers have advanced to grow faster, become larger with more breast meat, eat more feed at younger ages and be far more efficient than their predecessors, increasing their demand for water.  The modern broiler house is also equipped with cooling equipment that utilizes large amounts of water during hot weather.  All this has put more emphasis on the need for ample water supply and storage so birds can perform successfully.  Chance Bryant focuses on water flow rates and water temperature – factors that sometimes get overlooked.   How much water does a broiler need?  How much will a bird drink every day?  These questions are often asked by producers and are very appropriate in achieving high performance, as water consumption and feed consumption are highly correlated (Table 1).  In high performing flocks, at around 21 C, modern broilers on average will consume 1.8 to two times more water than feed, in weight.  Consumption is dependent on house temperature.  In hot climates, flocks can consume up to five times in weight the amount of feed they intake. Water consumption will vary depending on environmental temperature, feed quality and bird health.   Water consumption increases by six per cent for every increase in 1 C between 20-32 C. Water consumption increases by five per cent for every increase in 1 C between 32-38 C. Feed consumption decreases by 1.23 per cent for every increase in 1 C above 20 C Any substantial change in water usage should be investigated as this may indicate a water leak, health challenge or feed issue.  A drop in water consumption is often the first indicator of a flock problem. To evaluate flock performance properly we need to know how much water birds are consuming every day.  More advanced water meters record not only ‘daily’ consumption attainable, but enable an understanding of consumption at critical times of the day and critical times during the flock – both very relevant in assuring proper water intake.   These critical times can include feed changes, turning birds out from the brood area to three quarters or full house, transitioning from power ventilation to tunnel, field vaccinations, etc.  If you monitor consumption during these periods, you can better understand if flocks are being properly managed. WATER VOLUME AND ADEQUATE FLOWMany of today’s high performance broilers are being raised in housing built for the broiler of the past.  Unfortunately these houses are undersized, with inadequate plumbing and pipe sizing that struggles to keep up with the needs of modern high-performing and fast growth rate broilers. Worsening this situation can be the demand of cool cell systems, which often require twice as much water as the birds drink. With an inadequate plumbing system or pipe sizing water may be diverted from drinkers to the cooling system which will restrict water supply to the birds and so lower feed consumption.  Many broiler farms have multiple houses with large numbers of birds in each house.  Often, the lights come on at the same time in every house and without adequate water volume and flow rates some houses can experience a shortage of water during these high peak periods. All of these factors can decrease weight, increase FCR, create uniformity issues and place undue stress on birds, which can lead to an unhealthy flock. There are many options used to ensure water volume/flow will meet bird needs at high peak demand times.  Digital water meters connected to the house controller can monitor water consumption not only on a 24-hour basis but also in allotted time increments during the day. This information can help determine if our water system is keeping up at critical ‘high demand’ times, as when the lights come on after a dark period.  Knowing this can be very helpful in tracking down performance issues on a farm, especially one with big, multi-houses. WATER TEMPERATUREAs well as water quality and availability, the temperature of the water that birds are drinking needs to be considered.  During the first few days of brooding, consumption rates are low and the water flow through the system is minimal.  In a modern broiler house with very efficient heating systems the water temperature can easily exceed 35 C. This water temperature is not as palatable to chicks and can lead to low intake and poor performance.  Excessively warm water can also contribute to increased bacterial growth within the drinker system which can lead to higher bacterial infection within the flock. The ideal water temperature should be around 10-14 C coming from the source. Water consumed by the birds should never be allowed to increase above 30 C.  If this occurs the drinking system should be flushed periodically to maintain cooler, fresher water. SUMMARYWater is one of the crucial aspects of broiler flock management.  Understanding and managing water in broilers — providing them with fresh, clean, ample water when they need it — will help to achieve success flock after flock.   Chance Bryant ( This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it ), is technical manager - North America west region for Cobb-Vantress.
November 20, 2015 - An egg by-product processor and a specialty breed poultry producer are amongst the recipients of this year's regional Premier Award for Agri-Food Innovation Excellence.  Perth County Ingredients converts the waste from egg processing (inedible egg material called slurry or spinnings) into powdered, high-protein ingredients for animal feed and pet food manufacturers. With federal and provincial assistance, an egg processing plant in Perth County was brought back to life and retrofitted to process the by-product. Equipped with high-tech dryers, a pressurized membrane system and modified centrifuge technology, the facility has brought much-needed jobs to the area and supports local egg and hatchery operations, creating value from what would otherwise be landfill. READ MORE As Ontario's Asian population grows, so does demand for silkies. And Lakeside Game Farm is happy to supply these black-skinned, dark-fleshed chickens, named for their distinctively poofy plumage. Jim Ebert started out producing 100 chickens a week. Now he's up to 8,000, and he has contracted three more producers to supplement his own production. Customers can't get enough of the birds, which Ebert supplies the traditional way: fresh, rather than frozen, with the head and feet still on. With no sign of market saturation, Ebert has installed a new incubator to boost the hatch rate of his chicks, and he is building a state-of-the-art growing barn. He's also mentoring novice silkie producers under the Chicken Farmers of Ontario's new speciality breed program - growing a sector with plenty of untapped potential.  
MEALsource, the only non-profit health care purchasing group in the province (perhaps even in the country) is working hard to get more Ontario-grown food into hospitals, long-term care and other health care facilities. The agency, based in Brantford, Ontario and part of the St. Joseph’s Health System, has an active and ongoing goal to educate processors – and everyone else in agriculture – about health care institution contracts and help bidders prepare for the Request for Proposals (RFP) process. “There are always Ontario companies bidding for turkey contracts,” notes MEALsource contract specialist Wendy Smith. “And they are successful. The turkey folks have a good understanding of how we do business and they want a piece of it.” Smith notes that all the raw egg MEALsource contracts are currently served by Ontario companies and that there’s regular Ontario participation for cooked egg items. However, Smith says “We are not getting nearly enough Ontario bids for raw and cooked chicken. There were no Ontario-based bids for this year’s chicken contracts at all. The only Ontario companies we have ever had bids from are Pinty’s and DND Poultry. So that means it’s coming from the U.S. or out of province, but mostly the U.S.” (See sidebar for details on 2015 poultry meat contracts. These contracts are for two years, so the next round of bidding will begin January 1st 2017. However, some fully-cooked entre contracts which include poultry meat will be up for bidding in 2016.) MEALsource staff spend a lot of time making local connections at food shows and trade shows and giving presentations before the RFP process for a contract begins (once the RFP is posted, they can have contact with no one). “Typically a food broker or supplier will call us in, and we’ll present on the contract specifications, the reasons why they exists, the process we follow and more,” Smith says. “We’ve gone to Local Niagara, FoodShare, Greenbelt, anywhere we’re asked to go, we will go. We haven’t had any requests from a poultry company to give a presentation.” THE WELCOME MATIn addition to this ongoing work with industry and food groups, MEALsource has changed RFP’s to make the playing field more level. “It started in 2010 that food origin became a concern, a legitimate concern with regard to where tax dollars are going,” Smith explains. “We were invited to participate with the Greenbelt in a project to look at the origin of MEALsource contract food products in five categories: eggs, dairy, sliced whole meats and poultry (‘protein cooked’), cheese, and ‘other refrigerated products.’ We discovered a fair bit was local, but there could be a lot more.” Over the course of the 15-month project, $670 000 of contracts were moved to local companies through finding local vendors and inviting them to participate, equating to a 15 per cent local swing in all categories. “In 2011, we changed the RFP so that food origin must be stated,” Smith adds, “and so that in the case of a tie, the contract goes to the local vendor. The Broader Public Sector (BPS) Procurement Directive [a provincial directive put in place around that time] also requires all BPS institutions and/or their representatives running a contract process to offer the option of a debrief for bidders, where they can get feedback on the process and find out why their bids failed.” Before and after bids, MEALsource educates as much as it can. “We can’t give anyone an edge, but we can educate,” says Smith. “The international firms are very savvy, with almost an assumption that they will be successful in all their bids. It’s great to see new faces bidding. We would be happy to talk to chicken processors.” The Ontario Independent Meat Processors (OIMP) does not have an active relationship with MEALsource, says media relations lead Heather Mahachowitz, but supports more Ontario chicken going into Ontario health care institutions. “We communicate opportunities to our members if presented to us, and they will respond directly if interested,” she explains, clarifying that OIMP members are smaller independent operations. “We do not represent companies like Maple Leaf and Lilydale, who may have better resources to respond to RFP’s.” She adds that some MEALsource contract requirements may occlude OIMP members off the bat because of things like volume, delivery or HAACCP requirements. “That said, we would still like to share the opportunity and hopefully foster some connections between our members and MEALsource,” Mahachowitz notes. “[In addition], we would be happy to run/host an information session here at our Guelph office.” Smith says she is certain that MEALsource reps have met OIMP reps at many local food events over the past four years, and that she would be happy to meet with any and all interested vendors. Mahachowitz asks whether some institutions will only purchase from federally-inspected plants, which puts provincially-licensed plants at a competitive disadvantage. The answer from Smith is no. She says MEALsource has looked into this, and that there are no issues with bids from provincially-inspected plants. “It is a common misperception though,” she notes, “and worth addressing.” The Association of Ontario Chicken Processors (AOCP) does not get involved in the marketing and sale of chicken, says Mike Tertstra, AOCP Executive Director. “That function is left to each individual processor,” he explains, adding however that “AOCP members purchase approximately 95 per cent of the chicken grown by Ontario farmers and welcome opportunities to provide local chicken to Ontario consumers.” Tertstra did not say whether or not he had been in contact with MEALsource in the past when asked, but stated that “If you have information that I can give to members, I would be happy to do so.” Overall, there could be many reasons why processors in Ontario aren’t bidding on MEALsource contracts for cooked and raw chicken. It could be that they are focused on other markets, don’t have the resources to look into this sales avenue, or don’t feel it would be worthwhile. Some may not have products that are suitable. If you’re a processor inside or outside Ontario with comments on the topic, please contact us. In addition, if there is a similar agency to MEALsource in another province, please let us know. Other local food initiatives in OntarioTurkey Farmers of Ontario (TFO) has worked with some healthcare facilities in the province by promoting the nutritional benefits of turkey and its versatility with a variety of turkey menu features being offered. “In addition to the menu items, says TFO General Manager Janet Schlitt, “past program activities have included posters, consumer contests, on-site staff to discuss the nutritional facts of turkey, and giveaways of promotional items and recipe booklets.”   Egg Farmers of Ontario reaches out to more than 1,100 food service operators annually through personal visits to independent restaurants, meetings at restaurant chain head offices, contact at trade shows and mailings. “EFO generated 85 customized egg promotions in 264 locations last year for food service operators,” says Public Affairs Manager Bill Mitchell. “Over 100 restaurants used our point-of-purchase materials, such as table cards, posters, balloons and buttons. EFO operates an online portal Egg Chef that provides enhancements to operators participating in EFO’s food service program, while reducing production costs of the program. Operators can use the password-protected site to create customizable menus and point-of-sale material to be printed and shipped directly to their restaurants.” Chicken Famers of Ontario is focused on meeting all Ontario chicken markets, notes CFO Director of Communications and Government Relations Michael Edmonds. “CFO has developed and launched programs to encourage farmers and processors of all sizes to seek out and support currently underserved or emerging markets,” he adds. “CFO’s recently announced ‘Artisanal Chicken’ and ‘Local Niche Market Programs’ will supplement our traditional chicken and Specialty Breeds markets and will help provide additional opportunities for those looking to grow the Ontario market for locally-grown chicken.”
  While chefs and dieticians encourage the consumption of turkey and turkey products with nutritional information and delicious recipes, geneticists work away at the other end of the production chain, trying to create a better bird for a global market. The consumer may never have to worry about how to stuff a 60-pound turkey in their oven for Thanksgiving, but at our current rate of progress, it’s not out of line to suggest that the farmer can expect to turn out a 20-week tom of that size for further processing markets, while still needing to produce a smaller table bird with different and possibly unique characteristics. It’s a challenging task. Paige Rohlf is the research and development manager for Aviagen Turkeys Inc., where she manages the breeding program, selects pedigree lines, and implements new technology and selection techniques. As she explained to the audience at the 2015 PIC Innovations Conference, it takes up to four years for anything at the pedigree level to filter back into the farm level commercial bird and have an effect on the industry. “It still takes time,” Rohlf said. “It’s very important that we have feedback.” At the pedigree level, everyone is your customer. What’s working? What’s not working? Where is the industry going? What are the domestic and global trends? What does our Canadian bird look like now? AAFC monitors domestic turkey meat production by bird size: over 40 per cent of domestic Canadian turkey meat production is comprised of heavy birds – those weighing more than 11 kilograms – and mature turkeys. Turkey breasts coming from these large birds are used for deli products or turkey breast roasts, while the dark meat or meat from mature birds will end up as turkey kielbasa or pepperoni, turkey bacon, or turkey burgers and franks. The remaining birds that hit the market are less than 11 kilograms, with 75 per cent sold at retail as whole birds and the rest sold as parts. Our seasonal market parallels that of the U.S. with nearly 80 per cent of whole birds ending up on our Christmas or Thanksgiving tables. Globally, Aviagen is keeping its eye on current increased production in North Africa and Russia, and potential for increasing markets with importing countries such as Mexico, the EU, China, South Africa and Russia. In terms of consumption, Asia presents a real opportunity: South Central and Eastern Asia will be dependent on importing meat because the population is growing faster than production can support. In Taiwan, turkey is a working man’s meal, as it is more affordable for restaurants to purchase whole turkeys and boil them down to serve over rice than it is to purchase broilers. But it’s not just volume that must be contemplated when trying to define a “better bird.” The industry is also faced with factors such as increasing competition for land, water and resources, as well as an evolving consumer, making genetic decisions more challenging. In the EU, the industry has started labeling the carbon footprint on food. Rohlf predicts this trend will come our way. It’s hard to calculate but it makes people feel good to buy a product with claims of a lower carbon footprint. Add to this consumer concerns about fertilizer and pesticide use, housing and management systems, raising birds organically or with restricted antibiotics, and layered on top of changes from a whole bird market for making bigger birds and more eggs to a resource management perspective, all while keeping turkey competitive with broilers and pork. On the production side, think about where we raise the birds. It’s different all around the world, but over the past 70 years, there has been a global trend to raise them indoors, which Rohlf points to as a big step in the right direction in terms of survival. The bird we see is the result of genetics expressed in that environment. There are a lot more inputs we can now measure every day: their weight, feed conversion and health. We can control their environment, their feed, their water and their lighting, but how much can we control their genetics? What we can control by genetic selection is determined by the heritability of the trait – a highly heritable trait allows faster progress. For example, growth rate is highly heritable: a heavy tom mated with a heavy hen will have heavy offspring; the environment doesn’t matter as much. But it’s not all just as simple as weighing a bird. Feed efficiency is less heritable; reproduction traits, fitness or survival, and livability are much more influenced by the environment, therefore it is harder to make improvements in these traits and we have to rely on technology to collect information to make selection decisions. When it comes to nutrition, Rohlf then raises the question, how do we feed the birds to realize their full genetic potential? “This is where the challenges are.” While large companies have their own in-house nutritionists and feed companies generally know how to feed turkeys, there are no recent published standards (the last was in 1994). Since then, U.S. heavy toms have gotten 10 pounds heavier. Are we breeding for growth rate or breast meat yield? As the saying goes, the last bit of feed is the most efficient: the birds need to gain weight for maintenance, then they put on additional weight, then the feed goes to the breast. How do the birds use different feeds for maintenance? For growth? For breast meat production? Some in-house research is indicating protein levels can be reduced as long as amino acids are balanced, while alternative feedstuffs and fillers offer different amino acid spectrums over the traditional corn and soybean diet. More research is needed to determine how the birds utilize amino acids, or use new feeds such as dried distiller’s grains, or how probiotics will affect genetic potential.   Rohlf is excited about a new genetic opportunity with satellite cells. These myoblasts – baby muscle cells – are determined before a bird hatches but defined after the bird is hatched. Can we make more breast meat by promoting feed intake in the first few days after hatch to stimulate these satellite cells? Genetic programs have so far focused on efficiency, growth and fitness. For this year, Rohlf expects an improvement of 0.34 per cent in breast meat yield as per cent of live weight in toms at 20 weeks of age, continuing a steady pace of improvement. She also predicts four points of improvement in feed conversion for toms at 45 pounds (20.4 kg), from 2.45 to 2.41 pounds of feed per pound of gain. In weight, toms at 20 weeks of age will be 0.70 pounds (320 g) heavier this year. Aviagen Turkeys’ breeding goal also includes several measures of fitness, including walking ability and livability. These traits receive similar emphasis in selection as the growth and efficiency traits.      
March 10, 2016 - Chick Master is introducing a new tracking tool to monitor eggshell temperature in real time. The new tool, called Tempo, is now available with Chick Master’s Maestro Hatchery Management System on all Avida Symphony setters. The information provided by Tempo can aid hatcheries to improve chick quality. The current needs of the industry demand better tools to obtain maximum hatch results. Chick Master’s proven Maestro System is an intelligent management system that ensures communication, data monitoring and control of incubation and ventilation equipment to maximize hatchery performance. Robert Holzer, president of Chick Master said, “One of the key factors influencing high quality chick development is proper embryo temperature during the incubation period. Tempo now adds a new dimension by providing the user the ability to monitor egg shell temperature in each zone in the most uniform single stage setter today.” Tempo provides precise eggshell temperature data via a Resistance Temperature Detector (RTD) which is used in healthcare services and medical research where precise accuracy is required. The temperature readings are not affected by the radiating heat that surrounds the targeted egg providing more precise temperature information allowing the user to better evaluate and monitor optimal embryo development. Information provided by Tempo can be viewed as a graph on the Maestro Hatchery Management System or as a real time value on the machine’s touch screen. This feature will enable the user to modify the step program for factors including breeder flock age, egg size, fertility and season of the year to ensure proper temperature during the entire incubation process.
 UGA poultry science developed the Chkminvent app, a poultry house moisture removal and ventilation calculator intended to provide users with an estimated minimum ventilation rate required to remove the specified daily amount of moisture from a poultry house. Photo by Mike Czarick University of Georgia poultry housing experts have released the state’s first app to help poultry farmers determine how much they should ventilate their houses during cold weather. With thousands of birds living in a single house, keeping the air warm and fresh without spending a fortune on fuel during the winter can be one of the toughest challenges for broiler producers. The new app – called CHKMINVENT – is meant to simplify this process, said Mike Czarick, a poultry housing engineer at UGA’s Department of Poultry Science. “In the summertime, ventilation is fairly straightforward,” he said. “The more air they can move through the house, the better off their birds will be. In the winter, there is so much more at stake. Ventilate too much and you will have excessive energy costs and stressed birds. Ventilate too little you will have poor air quality and wet litter, which can lead to poor performance and health.” The app, available through Apple’s App Store, allows farmers to enter variables, such as the outside temperature, the amount of water the chickens consume, the temperature inside the house and the size of the poultry house’s fans. It then calculates how long farmers need to run their fans in order to remove excess moisture from the house and keep the chickens at a comfortable temperature. “The app gives people a starting point as to how much fresh air they need to bring in to control house air quality and litter moisture,” Czarick said. “It’s not intended to provide a precise minimum ventilation rate. It’s going to take adjusting, but this at least gives a scientifically based place to start.” For more information about the CHKMINVENT app, search for it on Apple’s App Store. For now, the app is only available for iPhone, but the team may develop versions for other operating systems based on demand for this initial version.   Merritt Melancon is a news editor with the University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences.          
  Incubation temperatures for egg embryos may need to be adjusted depending on the age of the broiler breeder flock and the strain of bird.  A study completed by Prof. Doug Korver at the University of Alberta shows that embryos from older flocks produce more of their own heat and if they overheat, embryonic metabolism actually slows down, which can affect early chick quality. “The metabolism of broiler chickens has changed substantially as they’ve been selected for growth rate and breast meat yield, but incubation time has not,” explains Korver. “Modern embryos tend to produce more heat, and as breeder birds get older, they lay bigger eggs with the potential to produce more heat.” Korver’s small but intensive study involved two modern commercial strains of broilers, Ross 308 and Ross 708. Embryos from young breeder birds (26-34 weeks old), mid-production breeders (35-45 weeks old), and older breeder flocks (age 46-55 weeks) were incubated at four different temperature settings: 36C, 36.5C, 37C and 37.5C. “Because the smaller embryos from younger breeder flocks produce less heat, they may need additional warmth in the incubator, whereas embryos from older flocks may need to be pulled from the hatcher sooner,” explains Korver. The optimum incubator temperature was found to be 37C; at higher temperatures, the Ross 708 embryos reduced their metabolism to try to avoid overheating, although this wasn’t the case with the Ross 308 strain. “Chick quality measures like weight and residual yolk sack weight were optimized at 37C,” he says. “In general, we tend to see lower growth rates and poorer performance with higher residual yolk sack weights.” The study results show that as genetic selection continues, it may become more necessary to target hatcher management based on the age of the breeder birds. Currently, however, most of the industry uses multi-stage hatchers with embryos from different ages of breeder birds and from different bird strains all going through together, which can make it challenging to tailor incubation conditions for a specific group of eggs. “As the industry moves to single stage hatchers, it will become more feasible to target incubation to different batches of eggs,” says Korver.      
November 13, 2014 -  Chore-Time Group, a  division of CTB, Inc. recently announced its plans to expand its manufacturing operations at its headquarters in Milford, Indiana.          Chore-Time will invest $7.11 million to construct and equip a 45,000-square-foot (4,180-square-meter) addition to its existing 350,000-square-foot (32,500-square-meter) facility in Milford.  The addition, which is expected to be operational by the middle of next year, will allow Chore-Time to increase its manufacturing operations and add storage to support growth in global demand for Chore-Time’s poultry, egg and pig production systems.The last expansion to Chore-Time’s Milford operation was in 1994, though CTB has had other expansion projects in Milford in recent years, including an expansion to CTB’s Brock Grain Systems division plant in 2007 and the purchase of a manufacturing and office facility for CTB’s PigTek Americas division in 2012.  Chore-Time also has facilities in Alabama, the Netherlands and Poland.
  It’s an easy mistake to make.  For the most part, they look the same, sound the same, walk the same, and behave pretty much the same.  There are just a few breeds of chicken and turkey, and within those, just a few widely used strains.  Because they seem so similar, a lot of growers tend to raise the breeds the same way, resulting in inconsistent performance, or one or both breeds performing poorly on a regular basis in a particular operation.  The question is, why does one bird perform poorly compared to the other for one grower, but for another grower, the same bird outperforms its counterpart?  Well, there are a few answers… HatcheryAll of the breeder companies are working toward the perfect bird, and each breed has its strengths.  But to truly find out what bird is best in any operation, they need to be raised in their ideal conditions, which can be significantly different – or maybe not necessarily so different, but small differences can significantly affect the end results.  The first example is one that is outside of the control of the producer, but can actually affect flock performance as much as any other factor, hatchery temperature and humidity profiles.  As you all know, especially in the day of mixed breed hatcheries, following the same profiles for different breeds can result in a much different chick / poult, or big differences in percent hatched of set eggs.  For those who are not well-versed in incubation and hatching, it may be surprising to find that the eggs are ventilated to release heat, rather than having to provide heat throughout the process to keep them warm.  This heat removal process is affected by egg size and shell thickness, so a strain with larger eggs or a breed with thicker shells may have a lower ambient temperature requirement to maintain the proper internal temperature.  A degree or two either way can dehydrate the poults, or alter their development, which can cause leg issues or high early mortality at the farm.  The profiles should even vary between eggs early in a flock to eggs late in a flock. TemperatureThe primary breeding companies have commercial management guides, and within the guides you’ll find several tables and graphs illustrating their best recommendations for optimum performance.  One of these will be a temperature profile table.  Some of the companies have gone to as much effort to provide them along with humidity ranges so temperatures can be adjusted if there are big shifts in humidity.  One example of a difference in temperature is in the general broiler guides where we see recommendations when humidity is 50 – 60% of 75 – 79°F for Cobb, 73 – 76.5°F for Ross.  The same types of differences can also be seen in turkeys.  It is easy to see how large swings in temperature can affect performance in the summer with decreased weights.  It has been shown in trials that small early differences from standard temperatures cause lost weight and disease that is difficult to compensate for later in the flock. NutritionTurkeys are a great example where breeds or strains within a breed can perform much differently when fed a diet not formulated for that particular bird.  Feeding a diet formulated for a different breed can actually result in weight shortfalls as much as a kilogram.  Leg, crop, feathering, and other issues can also result from formulations that are not tailored to the strain.  These types of performance problems can arise from imbalances in amino acids and other nutrients, like the balance of calcium and phosphorous.  There are strains of turkey that grow better than others when fed a veggie diet, and some are more suited for an antibiotic free program.  There are even seasonal differences, with some strains being particularly strong performers in the cooler months when low ventilation rates can cause respiratory problems or poor litter conditions, which normally would lead to higher condemn rates in other strains. LightingWhen it comes to lighting, there are many variables, and with some aspects, not enough research has been done to establish rock-solid standards.  There are still some questions, but there are some things we do know.  When it comes to colour, in general breeding birds respond to red and yellow tones best, around 3000K, while commercial birds are more flexible.  There has been little data showing much performance affect changing wavelengths for lighting meat birds.  Colour for the most part, though, is pretty universal for breeds and strains.  The real differences come in when we talk about dark periods and light intensity.   Ross recommends a first week light intensity of 40-50 lux, reduced to 5-10 thereafter, while Cobb is at 25 lux first week, and 5-10 following.  When it comes to turkeys, Hybrid, for example recommends 80-100 lux in brood, with a reduction to as little as 60 lux after that.  Dark periods are somewhat controversial because everyone has their own ideas about “midnight snacks”, or giving birds the equivalent of a full night of sleep a people would take.  Ross and Cobb, however, have recommendations, and they vary a little.  Ross advises one hour of dark in brood, 4 hours after that, and never more than six hours.  Cobb is also at one hour in brood, and anywhere from six to twelve hours (in the case of birds with an ADG greater than 60 grams).  These are pretty dramatic differences. In summary, it is clear that managing to the specifications of the breed and strain of bird you have is one of the big keys to maximizing performance.  From the hatchery and barn temperature and humidity profiles to the nutritional requirements and lighting recommendations, each factor can affect mortality, morbidity, feed conversion, and condemnation to a great extent.  It’s a great idea to make use of the management guides, nutritional information, and other technical support that breeding companies provide on their websites and through their representatives.    
Steve Lalonde, a chicken producer in Ormstown, Que., has been working in the chicken barn since he was 10 years old. He officially bought the farm from his dad in 1984, becoming the third generation to own the farm. The 80-acre farm is supplemented by an additional 140 acres he rents from a neighbour, which helps him and his wife, Loraine, produce several tons of organic popcorn each year. However, the heart of the farm is the 28,000 chickens that are raised on an eight-week rotational basis. “What I like about the chicken industry is how efficient the birds are and that chicken is one of the most popular meats on the market now,” says Lalonde. Over the last almost 40 years, Lalonde has seen lots of change on his farm, some by choice, and some less so. In June 2004, the Lalonde’s farm suffered a barn fire where they lost 13,000 two-week old birds, and rather than try to repair, they decided to rebuild the barn. “At the same time, we evaluated the whole chicken operation,” says Lalonde. Before the fire, they had two barns for chickens, but opted to close the second one because it didn’t meet the required standards and would have taken a significant amount of renovations to be up to par. Lalonde also saw this as an opportunity to have all the birds in one barn. They opted for a three-storey barn simply because the math didn’t add up. “There was not enough room in the yard for us to build a two-storey barn long enough for the number of birds we were going to keep,” says Lalonde. With the new barn, their bird count went up from 22,000 to 28,000. In the reconstruction, Lalonde also put in radiant floor heat on the first storey. “We felt that it would be easier for us in the future as we were in our 40s. If we were going to keep up with chicken production, we would be getting older and the clean out wouldn’t be as easy for us in 10 years or so,” says Lalonde. The radiant floor heat means the cement doesn’t sweat, it’s easier to clean out the barns, and Lalonde says the birds seem to enjoy it as well. “One thing we would have done differently is to add some conventional heat as the heated floor relies on the heat evaporating. While the floor is comfortable it is slow to heat the air on the first floor,” says Lalonde, “it also takes less bedding on the first floor as it acts as an insulator and keeps the heat from rising.” However, one of the biggest challenges in a three-storey barn was finding the right balconies for the catchers to stand on. “The first set were our own design and worked well but they soon became obsolete when the trailers used to transport the chickens changed,” says Lalonde. A custom re-design by an outside contractor solved that problem. Finding a way to easily access the middle door on the second storey was another challenge the contractor helped solve. The new barn is 40’x190’, plus a 10’ alley at the end. Each floor has five 18” fans, six 24” fans and four 36” fans. “I think would have added a couple more 36” fans but the ventilation is still adequate for the population of the barn,” says Lalonde. Since the new barn has been built, and even before, Lalonde has always done his best to monitor trends in the market, including antibiotic free birds. “We are very interested in producing antibiotic free birds but we need more information on this front,” says Lalonde. He says he is seeing conflicting reports about the economics. He is also concerned that if a treatment is required, the premium is lost and the added cost will come out of pocket. “With the quality of birds we have been getting lately, we have to treat at least two batches a year with antibiotics and I feel the financial risk is too high at the moment. As a small farm, I cannot afford to subsidize the abattoir,” says Lalonde. He explains that while he’s willing to take the risk, there is no clear gain or benefit and it will most likely end up costing him, rather than advancing, his business. While the market for antibiotics isn’t currently where it needs to be to benefit the small farm, Lalonde isn’t opposed to the notion in the future. Until then, his chicken farm is complemented by the popcorn business, and it works quite well. “We are able to use our own straw for the bedding (in the chicken barn), and the manure that the barn supplies is an excellent fertilizer for our fields,” says Lalonde. Lalonde started growing popcorn just over 10 years ago because it was his and his wife’s “snack of choice.” Since then, they have grown to now be selling seven to eight tons a year, with an ever-expanding market. He says having the popcorn business offers “added diversity of the farm operation.” They have added a grain cleaning facility to package their popcorn and to be able to clean their own grains for seeds. “This is a practice that works well on our organic farm. We like to be as self-sufficient as possible and this is just one way we do so,” says Lalonde. As their popcorn business grows, they plan to maintain the chicken farm until the moratorium on quota sales ends. While Lalonde enjoys the industry, he’s been involved in it for more than 36 years, and there may soon be the chance for someone else to take the reins.      
  An attempt to earn money for school 25 years ago has led to a thriving specialty poultry business for Trevor Allen of Skye Hi Farms in Chilliwack, B.C. Growing up on a 3.5 acre hobby farm in Maple Ridge (about an hour’s drive from his present farm), Allen always had an interest in livestock. He began as a 4-H goat pre-clubber, moved to lamb, then ended 4-H with both hogs and beef. At 14, he began hanging around a local feedlot, learning to operate the equipment and some of the ins and outs of commercial agriculture. When preparing to go to the local college, one of the feedlot owners, Steve Wynnyk, who grew a few turkeys on the side, suggested he grow a batch of turkeys for Christmas. “I started with 150 turkeys which ended up being 32 pounds each,” he recalls. He sold them by “cold-calling” on health food and other stores, most of whom had never sold turkeys before. At the same time, he was earning diplomas in livestock production and business management at the University of the Fraser Valley. As a first-generation farmer and self-styled entrepreneur, Allen “knew nothing about quotas or the supply management system.” He attended a few B.C. Turkey Marketing Board annual meetings (BCTMB) (“I sat in the back”) but basically flew under the radar until 2002, by which time he was growing 1,700 turkeys/year. At that point, then BCTMB-manager Colyn Welsh called. “Colyn gave me two options: I could cease and desist or I could become the board’s first new entrant direct vendor-producer,” Allen says. That was his first major turning point. Armed with a permit, he could approach financial institutions for a mortgage, allowing him and his mother to buy his present farm. Although his mother owns half the land and her own home on the property, she has no financial interest in the farm. By this time, Allen had married his wife Donna. Like Trevor, Donna is a first-generation farmer who went through the 4-H program while growing up on a Fraser Valley hobby farm. Although “I’m more into large animals,” she is fully involved in the poultry business, noting “turkeys are way easier on fences.” The Allens now grow about 7,000 hen turkeys/year for Thanksgiving and Christmas. “We could grow about 2,000 more but I can’t get the quota,” Trevor notes. “I put bids in six times but was only successful once.” He grows two flocks for each holiday, spaced three weeks apart to offer both 12-week and 15-week-old birds. For the first 4-5 weeks, the birds are kept inside a home-built barn. Once fully-feathered, the birds are turned out onto the range each morning and brought back into the barn each evening. The field is divided into paddocks using movable fencing, with each paddock able to access an open-roofed area the turkeys prefer during inclement weather. The turkeys are custom-processed as whole birds, then returned to the farm for warehousing, sorting and distribution. They are marketed as certified non-medicated, non-antibiotic free-range turkeys. “I deliver about 70 per cent direct to retailers myself and the other 30 per cent go through a local meat distributor,” Allen says, noting his website lists all 22 outlets that sell his turkeys. “All my retailers have my number so they can call me with questions or issues.” In 2004, he put his name on the B.C. Chicken Marketing Board (BCCMB) new entrant list. A year later, the B.C. Farm Industry Review Board’s Specialty Review ordered the boards to increase specialty and regional production by bringing new entrants into the industry. That led the BCCMB to offer him the choice of growing Taiwanese chickens immediately or waiting for a new entrant opportunity in mainstream chicken. Because FIRB wanted new mainstream production to be outside the Fraser Valley, Allen chose to grow Taiwanese chickens and now grows about 45,000 birds/year. The Taiwanese chickens are grown year-round in 16-week cycles. He was also appointed to the BCCMB’s Specialty Marketing Advisory Committee, along with Rob Donaldson, then the province’s largest specialty chicken grower, and another small grower, Casey van Ginkel. He and Casey decided they would have more control and perhaps even save some money if they produced their own chicks so they started their own Taiwanese chicken breeder flocks in 2010. “We bought a barn and equipment from a mainstream breeder going out of business and each took half. Since each of us didn’t need eggs year-round, we formed T & C Chick Sales and arranged our cycles so we could share the eggs,” Trevor explains. “We learned you need to have at least four breeder flocks with three in production at any time,” he says. Since they didn’t have enough of their own production to make that viable, they started selling chicks to other, mostly new entrant, Taiwanese chicken growers. “We will sell over 600,000 chicks this year.” Even though Donna insisted she would not pick eggs, Trevor appears to have been very hard-of-hearing that day. “I ended up doing all the egg picking and still pick 90 per cent of them,” she states, good-naturedly adding, “Trevor’s gotten a lot better the last few weeks.” T&C’s decision to become broiler breeders got a cold reception from the B.C. Broiler Hatching Egg Commission, even though the commission had decided, following FIRB’s Specialty Review, not to regulate specialty hatching egg production. BCBHEC’s efforts to stymie them resulted in a successful, yet still not fully resolved, FIRB appeal. In contrast, both the turkey and chicken boards, and their growers, appear to have welcomed Allen with open arms. He served as a B.C. Turkey Association director from 2003-2015 and has been serving as a director of the B.C. Chicken Growers Association since 2006. Although the BCCGA considers him its “de facto” specialty chicken director, Allen stresses he has been elected by and represents “all growers.” “Once you get past the marketing, we’re all the same. We all have OFFSAP and we all have biosecurity,” he notes, adding his hatchery, processing and wholesaling experience brings “a different perspective” to the board. While a director he has chaired the Emergency Response committee, served on the Poultry-in-Motion (educational trailer) committee, the agricultural waste control industry working group, the SE task force and the Sustainable Poultry Farming Group board. “I try to attend every producer meeting and all the FIRB appeals (even non-poultry) I can. My grandpa told me knowledge is power and I want to be the guy making informed decisions for the betterment of not only my farm but the industry as a whole.”      
  Project management is the process of initiating, planning, executing, controlling, and closing out work that is not part of the everyday practice of a business. Large organizations often employ or hire project managers (PMs), and have a team formed around this manager that can include department managers, directors, or labourers and consumers who may use the product of the project. This could apply to everything from creating a set of tweezers to building a nuclear power plant. This is a process that we should be applying when building our farms. The way we tend to build today is by talking to a friend to get some references on who we should work with. The next step is to go to the recommended builder, put together a floor plan that is the least cost to build, and maybe get a second price on that design. Then, once we’ve found a site or a location on our farm, we sign a contract with the builder and take our floor plan to the recommended equipment supplier so they can fit the ventilation and equipment into the barn we designed. Many times the building is started before the equipment companies are even contacted. If the equipment supplier is lucky, the producer may have consulted with a ventilation engineer beforehand to optimize the layout. And let’s hope that engineer has experience with poultry and has continued to pursue further ventilation education over the years. Now, this equipment supplier may or may not have any actual training themselves, and if they do, it’s just as likely to be sales training, as opposed to poultry husbandry training. Salespeople are in a tough position — they have to balance achieving their sales targets with the long-term production needs of the farmer. As a former sales representative myself, I faced the same challenges. What are the chances that any one equipment company has all of the best equipment? And if you choose to piecemeal the job, how do you know for sure what is the best equipment for your operation? The quote by Alexander Graham Bell, “The sun’s rays do not burn until brought to a focus,” is a perfect analogy for the PM. A PM can be the magnifying glass that aims all the beams of information into creating the optimal production environment for the birds. An ideal PM would have experience or training in all aspects of live production, and an expansive knowledge base of the range of equipment and builders available. Let’s look at what goes into constructing a new barn or farm, and what the advantages of working with a PM can be. SITE PLANNINGFinding the right site and the right location on the site is extremely important. This aspect of construction alone can justify the cost of hiring a PM. Site engineers can sometimes be ambitious about the excavation that needs to be done to accommodate a structure. A hundred extra loads of fill or moving materials two or three times can add up quickly. Having someone with experience to oversee this can save a lot of cost and headaches. It’s very unlikely that a site engineer will take things like poultry biosecurity into consideration. Do they know the best distance between poultry barns, and the best orientation with regard to prevailing winds or sun? The same applies to the next step. BUILDING DESIGNBuilders will construct the barn that fits the parameters you provide, whether that is the top of the line, or the lowest cost structure. Many times this compromises the biosecurity and the functionality of the finished barn. Many people don’t realize all the options available because they haven’t seen buildings in Europe, the United States, or the rest of the world. Saving money on the structure doesn’t necessarily mean saving money on equipment or maximizing the performance of the birds. The primary aspects affected are ventilation and heating. Certain building dimensions don’t lend themselves to certain types of ventilation and heating. Going wide, for example, is not ideal for tunnel ventilation; it can result in requiring two rows of heaters, and can produce significantly different conditions from one side to the other if cross ventilating. When we put a control room inside the barn footprint, we create dead spots in the ventilation, especially when located on the inlet side. Are we able to attain a suitable air speed with the fewest fans? Are we avoiding all possible obstructions to the ventilation, such as gas and water pipes? These are small details that can greatly affect the air and litter conditions. EQUIPMENTTightly tied into the building dimensions is the equipment layout. It affects ventilation, and the building affects how the equipment can be installed. Sometimes it is possible to get more equipment per bird into a barn, while maintaining or reducing cost. With some new heater technologies, it’s possible to run a single row of heaters down the middle of the barn and achieve more than adequate temperatures at the wall with more even coverage. Outside of equipment layout, one of the benefits of having an objective PM is that they can help you choose the best of each type of equipment, and help to find and apply the latest technology without having to consider sales targets. The only contemplation for an independent PM is finding what will give you the best results on cost and performance. They can consider the cost-benefit to upgrading certain options. They’ll also consider how the equipment works together. This could involve ensuring compatibility of all the elements of a single barn, or in the example of a multi-stage operation, ensuring the transitions from one barn and equipment to the next are smooth. Everyone knows control systems, data collection, and communication can be difficult to decipher, so it can help greatly to have an expert in your corner. They can also provide follow up service and management tips after the buildings are in operation. COORDINATION, RESOURCES and PRICE NEGOTIATIONSFrom research organizations like universities to a variety of equipment suppliers and contractors, as well as other poultry companies and producers, PMs have many sources to draw on. They may be able to bring in builders from another area when the local builders are too busy. They are always learning as they are teaching, which is extremely valuable. Many athletes who become coaches suddenly have a bunch of epiphanies about how the game works, and the same applies in poultry production. Part of the reason many companies have PMs is because they have come to the conclusion that it is difficult to do your everyday job and add the task of managing a large project on top of it without sacrificing on the quality of one or the other. It’s quite clear that having a dedicated manager to work on your project temporarily will alleviate this problem. Price negotiation is something else a PM can assist with. They have ongoing access to pricing and know what the standards are in the industry. A grower who buys a feed system every 20 years has no measuring stick for what the cost of equipment and installation should be. Most producers only get one or two opportunities to build, which means there is limited or no experience when the opportunity presents itself. If you look at building a barn or a farm as navigating though the wilderness, it’s a lot safer to have a guide! I’ve been lucky enough to work with excellent guides and coaches myself, and have seen first-hand how a PM can plan and manage a project. Good PMs will pay for themselves several times over by providing the required expertise to save on building and production costs, while helping you optimize bird performance. They can help you attain all the goals you’ve set out for your farm.   Shawn Conley is a project manager with Hendrix Genetics and operations manager of Weeden Environments. He can be reached by email:  This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it        
  Organic and specialty chicken production may only represent a small fraction of Canadian chicken production, but it’s big business at British Columbia’s Oranya Farms. Corry Spitters and his sons Jeffrey and Jordan have over 50 barns (floors) and are building 10 more. “We now have about 250,000 birds in production at any given time,” they say. Oranya produces Taiwanese chicken and Silkies on side-by-side farms in Aldergrove and organic chicken on an ever-expanding farm in Abbotsford. “We grow about 80 per cent of the Silkies and Taiwanese chicken for the Canadian market.” Each flock of Silkies (so named because of their snow white soft silk-like feathers which, ironically, cover a jet-black skin) is about 24,000 birds and takes 120 days to reach maturity. “Silkies eat very little,” the Spitters explain. “We supplement the automatic feeders with paper feed to encourage them to eat.” They are also not very good at converting what little they eat. A good Silkie feed conversion ratio is only 3.6-4.2:1 (3.6 kgs of feed produces 1 kg of bird weight), less than half the 1.5 conversion ratio for conventional broilers. As a result, Silkies are mostly skin and bone, weighing only 1.2-1.3 kgs when shipped. They are, however, very flavourful, and used to make a chicken soup highly prized at Chinese weddings and festivals. The Taiwanese chickens (TCs) are also destined for the ethnic Chinese market, but as a meat bird. Shipped at 78 days, their meat is more yellow than conventional broilers. Marigold and other ingredients are added to the pelletized feed to enhance both colour and flavour. “The meat takes on the flavour of what the birds eat,” Corry notes. Breeders are trying to introduce some broiler genetics into the TCs so they grow faster but that is fraught with danger as it reduces the flavour – the TCs primary selling point. Oranya has up to 32 flocks of TCs and Silkies on the go at any given time, but that pales compared to their organic chicken production. “We produce 65-70 per cent of the organic chicken in B.C.,” Corry says, noting the farm ships out about 50,000 birds each week. The chicken is grown on demand for three B.C. processors: Lilydale (Sofina Foods), Sunrise Farms and Rossdown Natural Foods. Although Silkies and TCs have a separate quota allocation, Oranya had to acquire mainstream quota to produce its organic chicken. The B.C. Chicken Marketing Board is grandfathering organic growers until July 2016, but what will happen after that is anyone’s guess. Oranya appealed the BCCMB’s rules governing quota allocations for organic chicken, but the B.C. Farm Industry Review Board has rejected the appeal, telling the two sides to negotiate a solution. In the meantime, Oranya is moving ahead with expansion of their organic production. They already have 24 barns (each building is two storeys and counted as two barns) and are building another 10 over the next two years, each about 80X200 feet. “Costco alone currently markets 25,000 kg/week of organic chicken in B.C. and Alberta and told us they expect to grow that market to 100,000 kgs,” Spitters says. “We intend to grow with them.” When fully built out, the farm will be capable of producing 50,000 birds/week. Once market demand exceeds that, the Spitters intend to build another farm just like it. To avoid paying the City of Abbotsford development cost charges of about $5,000/building, the farm built its own water treatment system. It uses two 26-foot-deep wells, producing up to 130 gallons/minute. The system includes state-of-the-art filtration to remove the 5 ppm iron content and soften the water, making it virtually pure. “Our facility could service a town of 25,000,” Spitters says, noting the farm uses 1000-1200 cubic metres of water/day. At first glace, using double decker barns seems to go against organic standards. But the Spitters have found an innovative way to comply. They note the standards only require chicken to have outdoor access after three weeks old. Therefore the birds are raised on the upper floor for three weeks, then sent down a chute to the main floor which does have outdoor access, where they remain for the next seven weeks. This allows Oranya to reduce overall building footprints and helps minimize disease pressure, critical when organic standards forbid the use of antibiotics. Each barn is thoroughly cleaned after each flock and filled with fresh litter. “Because birds get fresh litter partway through the growing cycles, it arrests pathogen buildup,” Spitters says. Outdoor pastures are located between two barns and shared by the two flocks. Trees have been planted in the pastures and “toys” placed in the barns to meet the criteria for humane certification. “Everything we do not only has to be sustainable but meet both organic and humane certification standards,” Spitters explains.  Oranya used to contract out moving and catching but now use their own crews. “When a bird is worth $10 or more, you can’t afford losses and the contractors weren’t as careful as we wanted them to be.” By starting one flock while the previous one is still on its way out, the Spitters are able to grow up to 210 flocks per year. Corry has been in the poultry equipment business since 1977 and lauds the cost and production benefits of using the latest technology. The Spitters use LED lighting in all barns and are the first producers in Canada to start using a SKOV system to manage feeding and ventilation. “Our older system works on set points,” Corry explains. Vents are opened and closed and fans turned on and off based on specific climate settings. The SKOV system “is a smart algorithm. It works on anticipation.” It uses current and historical data to predict conditions and manages the barns accordingly. Not only can everything be monitored remotely by smartphone, but the system sends out alerts when it detects an issue. It also monitors load cells on each of the feed bins using the data to communicate with the supplier when feed is required. “We monitor everything and can sample a lot faster than most growers,” Corry says. “We can see instantly when a flock isn’t performing.”      
  Getting into the chicken industry under the Chicken Farmers of Ontario (CFO) New Entrant Program is a long-term commitment, but for Jamie and Melissa English of Alliston, it was exactly the opportunity they wanted. Both Jamie and Melissa had grown up on a family farm. Their parents relied heavily on outside jobs for income. Melissa’s parents ran a cow-calf operation and worked for the Ministry of Transportation Ontario; Jamie’s parents farmed potatoes and grains before moving into the logistics industry. For these farm kids, their challenge was to find a way to get back into farming and they found it through the New Entrant Program. It was 2012 when the young couple first heard about the program. They started researching the industry, talking to farmers to find out what was involved. “We wanted to make sure this was what we actually wanted to do… what the industry was like.” Under the program formula, new farmers were required to buy 4,000 units of quota and borrow the other 10,000 units from the CFO to meet the minimum production requirement of 14,000 units. The market sets the quota price, making it difficult to predict the eventual total investment. Between five and fifteen years the 10,000 units are paid back to the CFO under a timed schedule. The application process involves presenting a business plan to an industry panel of financial and farming experts that evaluates the application and makes recommendations to the CFO Board of Directors. Successful applicants have up to 18 months from the date of approval to execute their business plans. The next step was to get a business plan together. The application was handed in on the 31st of October and the green light was given in March 2014. Jamie and Melissa were very excited to be one of two farms chosen and soon began construction on their new facility. “There was a lot of red tape with setbacks and also with Nutrient Management, so those were a few challenges,” said Jamie. They knew they only had one chance to build, going with a 16,500 square foot barn, large enough to capture future growth but small enough to manage costs. Jamie really focused on the equipment because that’s where he felt he’d get good payback. They went with a system of what he called ‘back-end brooding’ - where the birds were kept to a smaller area for the first 10 days so that the humidity and temperature could be controlled. He added extra drinkers to give the birds a really good start and extra heaters help to keep the temperature even. Their first transition crop was in October 2014 and Jamie admitted they “had a bit of a learning curve.” That first flock had five percent mortality but they met their weight targets; their second flock had 3.2 percent mortality and their weights were a little over, held back a day on the processing end. These first two flocks seeded the barn with good bacteria to help the next flock to fight disease naturally; their next flock will be meet full RWA (Raised Without Antibiotics) criteria. Jamie gives thanks to the many farmers and other people in the industry that continue to give them a lot of help and advice and leadership. “A lot of people were very open; local farmers helped out immensely.” Overall Jamie is a huge fan of the quota system, knowing that he’s building something that he can pass down to their children. “We’d be crazy if we ever had the chance to lose it and didn’t make sure we did everything we could to hang onto it.” As Jamie prepares for his next flock, he continues to work off farm as well, but for his family, “it’s good to get back to where our roots are and into something we’re passionate about. For that we’re really fortunate to be part of this program - it’s helped us to get into something that we really wanted to do.” The story was similar for Joannette and Jim Van Hemert, only for them it was a new adventure as egg farmers. Jim Van Hemert is a Ridgetown graduate and obtained his B.Sc. in Ag. Business at the University of Guelph before taking positions as an account manager at TD Canada Trust, then RBC, but his real passion was in farming. He grew up on a poultry farm in the Fraser Valley of British Columbia. His wife Joannette grew up in Norwich and shares a similar strong financial background - the McMaster graduate obtained her CA designation in 2010. They combined their business savvy to analyze several different options to get into farming, deciding in 2011 to buy a turkey breeder operation in Ingersoll. Not long after moving in, Jim began growing turkey poults at a rented property in Thorndale, bringing them in as day olds, growing them until they became mature breeding stock before transferring them to the Ingersoll farm. It was around the same time that they started asking questions about the New Entrant Quota Loan Pool (NEQLP) program. It was an opportunity to diversify their operation from being solely reliant on a contract with Maple Leaf Foods as well as enabling them to take advantage of the benefits of supply management: reduced price risk, increased stability and long term sustainability. As for the business side of the equation, it was also a means of reinvesting cash flow into the company. The Egg Farmers of Ontario NEQLP program, now in its fifth year, lends up to 10,000 units of quota split between two new entrants every year according to the needs of their business plan. The quota is lent on a 1:2 ratio, meaning that one unit must be purchased for every two units loaned. After 10 years, the quota is returned to the EFO in ten annual installments. Overall it is a 20-year commitment. The application consisted of forms and a business plan – a 10-page written report  - that were both submitted in May 2012. It was a long wait until September to hear they were finalists and a one-hour interview would be arranged. The interview was successful; it was now November 2012. They had 18 months in which to begin production and there was a lot of work to be done. Where would they build a barn? What systems would they use? How large would the barn be? Would there be quota available to purchase? Their original projections were for 12,500 hens. That quickly rose to 15,000. With that number in mind, details of the actual project started to surface, such as finding the right building contractors and deciding which equipment to install? Due to disease transmission concerns with the turkey operation they needed to seek a new location for their 290’ x 30’ layer barn, finding a 70-acre property within a short drive of their farm where they could build. They decided that traditional cages would be the most cost effective and efficient system to install. The enriched cages represented additional costs without benefit, and free run was considered too labour intensive. By July 2013, Bright Horizon Farms announced their open house in the paper. With some help from the industry that included Clarke, New Life, Burnbrae and McKinley Hatchery, their first flock arrived in the new red and white barns on July 16, 2013. Despite some trouble with cracked eggs, Joannette considered that first flock a success. Looking back, Joannette sees the NEQLP program as an opportunity to farm with the stability that was lacking in the turkey breeding operation. Without it, they wouldn’t be layer farmers today.      
  Floor and slat eggs can be a huge problem in a breeder flock.  Not only do they lower hatch and production for the hatchery, but they also lead to poorer chick quality.  More importantly for the farmer, this leads to lower profit and increased work picking up these eggs.   Many management techniques are used to help reduce this problem.  These are some of the ideas that have been used by many producers. BODY CONDITIONThe most important factor in reducing floor and slat eggs is simply — if it were really that simple —to have the birds in the proper condition at light stimulation.  This means having them developed with the correct fleshing and fat reserve.  This will be a key factor to the birds developing the natural instinct to go to the nest to lay their eggs. Having the birds in the right condition at lighting is heavily influenced by ensuring the correct bodyweight gain from 16 to 20 weeks of age has been achieved.  We are looking to have the birds gain 33-35 per cent in bodyweight from 16 weeks to 20 weeks old.  By doing this we are likely to have the correct fleshing and adequate fat reserve.  Often with flocks over the bodyweight standard at 16 weeks, we are tempted to try and control the weight gains from that point and have the birds on the target at 20 weeks.  This results in the birds not gaining enough weight relative to their 16-week bodyweight and therefore not being in the proper condition at 20 weeks of age. When deciding what the correct bodyweight is, you need to keep two things in mind: What line of females you are using, and when will the birds come into production.  The line of the female is important as different lines have different bodyweight targets for lighting.  For example, the Cobb 500SF requires a heavier bodyweight at lighting than the Cobb 500FF.  Typically, flocks that will be coming into production during decreasing day lengths also require a heavier bodyweight at lighting.   Another aspect to consider, especially when moving into a solid wall production barn, is the amount of natural light coming into the barn.  You may be keeping the birds on eight hours of light after transfer believing you are not light stimulating the flock.  In reality, in many cases, so much light is leaking into the barn that the females are light stimulated from the day of transfer. Even though these birds may be moved at a time that technically they are “in season” flocks and would normally be on a lower bodyweight standard, because of the early light stimulation they should be reared on a heavier, ‘out of season’ standard.  This will help make sure the birds are ready for the light stimulation and ready to go to the nest.  This is especially important for the Cobb 500SF. Having the birds in the correct condition means meeting some guidelines for fleshing and reserve.  To check this we need to pen up enough females (around 50) to get a good idea of the condition of the flock.  In scoring the females, we want to see 95 per cent of the birds scoring a 3 or 4 on fleshing and at least 90 per cent of the birds with pelvic fat.  If we have this, the flock should be ready to receive light and ready to go to the nest. If the females are not in the proper condition, then you need to delay light stimulation on this flock.           TRAININGWhile having the birds in the right condition is the top priority, there are many other things that we can do, or items to look at, that will help ensure the females go to the nest. Training the birds begins in the pullet barn.  This is done by placing something in the pullet barn to simulate jumping up on to the slats, such as a perch rail or actual slat section for the birds to get up on.  This should be done early, between the ages of three and four weeks to give an early brain imprint that jumping up is allowed. The training of the birds continues after they are moved to the production barn.  Once there walk the birds slowly to encourage them to get up out of the scratch area and onto the slats.  Many have been hesitant to walk the slats but this will help move the birds to the nest when done correctly, especially on wider slats.  Walking should be done on the outside edge of the slats in a slow manner that will encourage the birds to move toward the nests.  After the birds are light stimulated, some customers walk the birds as much as once per hour to train them to go to the nest. NEST SPACEHaving the proper nest space is also very important.  If there is not enough space to easily accommodate the birds, they will look for a place outside the nest to lay their eggs.  The minimum amount of nest space needed is one square meter of nest space per 100 birds. Another way to express this is 200 birds per nest segment of four nest openings of a 2.4 m long nest unit. Opening the curtain at the nest entrance — while these curtains are there to shade the entrance to the nests, opening them will help get the birds into the nests.  Many producers have seen that if they are having a problem with the birds just standing at the entrance to the nest, they can open these curtains to encourage the birds to go inside.  They open the curtains by taping or clipping them to the top of the nests.  While some have waited to see how the birds go to the nest before making the decision whether to open the curtains, many producers will start this practice when the flock is housed and the nests are opened.  The recommendation is to open every other curtain. This allows the females to more easily see inside the nests and seems to make them more curious about going inside.  These curtains can then be gradually lowered once it is seen that the majority of the birds are going to the nests.  On certain nest systems, producers have opened the entire top of every other nest as an alternative to just opening the curtain.  Some producers have opted to install a winch system allowing them to raise all the nest tops at the same time.  They will not open them fully, just enough to allow the birds more space to enter into and see into the nest. LIGHTINGHaving the right intensity and even light distribution plays a big role in how the flock comes into production and where the hen wants to lay her egg. We want to see a minimum of 60 lux at bird level, and minimize the difference in distribution across the barn — this needs to be less than 20 per cent.  Having this minimum light intensity and even light distribution will help eliminate shadows and dark areas that would encourage the birds to lay their eggs outside the nest. EGG BELTThe egg belt should not be visible to the hen when she enters the nest.  If the hen can see the moving belt, she is more likely to be scared out of the nest. Having the belt shielded properly will prevent the hen from seeing the belt.  Small, plastic movable flaps are installed for this purpose.   LITTER DEPTHPlacing very little shavings in the barns helps to discourage the birds from laying eggs in the floor;  2-3 cm of shavings in the scratch area is sufficient.  Additional shaving can be added to the scratch area post peak, if desired, but is normally not done due to the litter build-up giving additional litter depth. EQUIPMENT LAYOUTDrinker lines should be close enough to the nest entrance to help draw the birds to the nest.  This distance is normally 60-70 cm from the nest entrance.  Never place all the feed lines in the floor.  Having part of the feeders on the floor and on the slats encourages the birds to use both areas.  Spacing should be such that the birds can easily utilize the water line and all feed lines.  Also, feeder height should be high enough so that the birds can move freely underneath the feed lines — approximately 20cm to the bottom of the feeder.  Another option is to raise the feeder lines with an electric winch after the feed has been consumed.  This is more important for pan feeder equipment placed on the slats, which tends to give more shaded areas.  Chain feeder lines are normally placed directly on the slats and a bracket is used to keep the troughs horizontal. WATER FLOW RATEA low water flow rate will increase the time the birds have to spend at the drinker lines.  A minimum flow rate of approximately 60-80 ml/min is desired.  A low flow rate will cause a wall of birds between the hens trying to get to the nest and the nests themselves.  If the hens cannot get to the nest because of this wall, they will simply lay their eggs outside the nest or drop them close to the drinker line. Many broken eggs are found under the slats at the drinker line area. While there are many items that contribute to where the hen chooses to lay her egg, taking care of the basics goes a long way towards making sure the eggs do end up in the nest.       
August 12, 2016 - New-Life Mills, the animal feed division of Parrish & Heimbecker Limited and P & H Eastern Grain Division have pooled resources to launch the new Science of Sustainable Agriculture Expo at this year’s Canada’s Outdoor Farm Show in Woodstock, Ont. from Sept. 13th-15th 2016. The exhibit will explore the elaborate connectedness of today’s agricultural world with sustainability in the forefront. The display at the Farm Show will be both educational for the inexperienced and eye-opening for the savvy farmer.   “It’s amazing how nearly every aspect of what we do in agriculture is connected on some level. We are among the most responsible of industries when it comes to ensuring nothing goes to waste,” says Sherry Slejska, marketing communications specialist, New-Life Mills. “To my knowledge, this will be the largest initiative P&H has ever started to show the community how deeply involved we are in helping them produce crops, market crops, transport crops and feed livestock through a spider web of interactions between Ontario’s livestock and cash crop growers as well as many other commercial players. We are involved in almost every step from fertilizing the crop to grinding it into flour and opening up their marketing opportunities to the world. Most farmers don’t realize that,“ advises Jeff Jacques (Sales Mgr Crop Inputs and Agronomy, Parrish & Heimbecker, Eastern Grain Div.).
August 4, 2016 - Aviagen has added Matt Klassen to its customer service team to better care for customers in Canada. Klassen’s central location in Abbotsford, British Columbia, will enable him to work in close proximity to Aviagen customers west of Manitoba. As an Aviagen Customer Support Representative, Klassen will work hand-in-hand with customers, helping them reach the maximum performance potential with Aviagen’s Ross® brand of breeding stock. He will benefit poultry farmers and producers with his expert guidance and advice in key areas necessary for flock success, such as best management practices, feed and nutrition, hatchery operations and biosecurity. His objective will be to help customers get the most from their flock operations by improving efficiencies and thus increasing productivity and performance. Klassen has a well-rounded, 22-year background in the poultry industry. His career began in the early 1990s in Abbotsford, where he worked his way up from chick delivery and service to hatchery and feed mill management. In his most recent position at the British Columbia Broiler Hatching Egg Commission, he served as hatchery inspector, troubleshooting hatchery and production issues and advising the commission on policy changes regarding hatcheries. It was this breadth of experience, along with proven communication and relationship-building skills that landed him the position at Aviagen. Klassen has joined Aviagen during a momentous landmark in the company’s history. This year marks the 60th anniversary of the Aviagen Ross brand, which enjoys high popularity in Canada. It is this widespread popularity of Ross in Canada, according to Scott Gillingham, Aviagen Canada’s regional business consultant, that has spawned growth in the region and prompted the company to extend its arm of support. “Klassen was the ideal candidate to add value to our Canadian customer service team due to his established relationships and thorough understanding of the Canadian poultry market. His strong communication skills and collaborative personality will help maintain and deepen the trust and confidence customers have in the and collaborative personality will help maintain and deepen the trust and confidence customers have in the Ross team and Ross products.”   
August 2, 2016 - Attendee and exhibitor registration and housing for the 2017 International Production & Processing Expo (IPPE) is now open. IPPE has secured more than 1,060 exhibitors with more than 507,000 net square feet of exhibit space already booked. The Expo is expecting to attract more than 30,000 attendees through the collaboration of the three trade shows - International Poultry Expo, International Feed Expo and International Meat Expo - representing the entire chain of protein and feed production and processing. The event is sponsored by U.S. Poultry & Egg Association (USPOULTRY), the American Feed Industry Association (AFIA) and the North American Meat Institute (NAMI).  Register online and receive a discounted price of $50 (USD) through Dec. 31. Online registration is the only way to receive this discount. Beginning Jan. 1, 2017, the registration fee will increase to $100. The IPPE website,, offers easy navigation with access to important information including attendee and exhibitor registration, hotel availability and reservations and a schedule of 2017 educational seminars and activities offered during IPPE. The annual global feed, meat and poultry industry trade show is scheduled Tuesday through Thursday, Jan. 31 – Feb. 2, 2017, at the Georgia World Congress Center in Atlanta, Ga., USA. Resuming for 2017 is the popular “Members to Atlanta” (M2A) program, which waives the registration fee through Dec. 31, for attendees from member firms of all three associations engaged in the production of poultry, eggs and meat for consumption and feed and pet food manufacturers. The program is supported through the sponsorship of elite IPPE exhibitors. They include Arm & Hammer, Aviagen, Biomin, Ceva Animal Health, Cobb-Vantress, Diamond V, Elanco Animal Health, Heat and Control, Huvepharma, Incubation Systems, Inc., Jamesway Incubator Co., Kemin, Soybean Meal Information Center, Watt Global Media and Zoetis.  The Expo will highlight the latest technology, equipment and services used in the production and processing of meat, poultry and animal feed. The week of Jan. 30 – Feb. 3, 2017, will feature dynamic education programs focused on current industry issues. The International Poultry Scientific Forum, Spanish Technical Seminar for Maximizing the Efficiency of the Poultry Industry, Pet Food Conference and the Environmental Conference for the Meat & Poultry Industry will kick off the week’s education programs. Several Tech Talks programs will also be offered on Tuesday and Wednesday. In addition, the Animal Agriculture Sustainability Summit, Worker Safety Conference for the Meat & Poultry Industry, Poultry Market Intelligence Forum and the International Rendering Symposium education programs will return for 2017. The 2017 IPPE will also feature several new educational programs including important sessions on food safety, consumer trends and international trade. The following programs are new for 2017: Worker Safety Conference for the Meat & Poultry Industry; Listeria monocytogenes Prevention & Control Workshop; Meat Quality Workshop: Know Your Muscle, Know Your Meat; FSMA Hazard Analysis Training; Pork 101; Family Businesses Strategies for Success; Beef 101; Feed Production Education Program; U.S. Employment Law Regulatory Update; Meat Industry Regulatory Update and Compliance Session; Setting Up for Success: Processed Meat Product Introductions; Get the Facts with Meat Mythcrushers; Whole Genome Sequencing 101; Understanding and Achieving Operational Excellence; and Toxic Release Inventory Reporting Guidance Workshop. For more information about the 2017 IPPE, visit   
July 26, 2016 - The Agricultural Institute of Canada (AIC) has released its 2016 Conference Report (the Report) that summarizes the need for the agricultural sector to better disseminate research results to producers, farmers, industry, academia, consumers and among the research community.  A number of findings and recommendations are included in the Report. One key finding is that research dissemination has often been neglected in past policy development or is left until the end of the project cycle, which needs to change in order to increase stakeholder engagement and allow for greater impact of results.  Another is that the sector needs to find new ways to incent and support knowledge transfer activities. “Last year, we broke new ground by releasing Canada’s first-ever agricultural research policy, a long-standing objective for the sector and for AIC," says Serge Buy, CEO for AIC.  This year, we are continuing our work by raising awareness of the need to better communicate and disseminate agricultural research.  We need to collectively ensure that game-changing results have the impact that they deserve in Canada and internationally.” The Report also discusses the role that Intellectual Property (IP) has to play in the dissemination of research outcomes.  Although the commercialization of research results can certainly lead to a positive rate of return on investment, IP management is often debated or misunderstood and not recognized as a potential dissemination route for Canadian innovations. The Report focuses on three key themes: Dissemination Strategies and Participation Channels for Agricultural Research Knowledge Transfer (KT) and Extension IP Protection, Cooperation and Collaboration The Report is a summary of the input gathered in policy discussions with researchers, government officials and other industry stakeholders at the annual AIC Conference that took place in April 2016. A subsequent, in-depth Best Practices Report for Research Dissemination that highlights a number of best practices from across the sector will be released by AIC in late Summer 2016. To view the 2016 Conference Report click here. Highlights of the report “A scientific breakthrough that could dramatically change how farmers harvest, or manufacturers prepare a certain product, is discovered in a lab.  How do we get this vital information from the research to benefit the end user?” – Theme 1, Page 8 “…farming has become an increasingly complex undertaking. The sector must find ways to unpack the complexity and tell stories in clear, uncomplicated ways to deliver strong, but accurate messages using adequate channels.” – Theme 1, Page 10 “The inclusion of funding for KT and extension activities in the next Federal-Provincial-Territorial Policy Framework…and enhanced collaboration across the sector can enable the environment needed to implement new participatory research methods and enable effective knowledge transfer.” – Theme 2, Page 15 “Intellectual property rights (IPR) affect nearly every part of the research process from initial development to the sharing of results with other researchers.  It is also an area of great debate and misunderstanding not only in agricultural research but also in other areas of scientific research.” – Theme 3, Page 19 “Stronger IP agreements and partnerships can also help Canadian agricultural research achieve a competitive advantage at the international level.” – Theme 3, Page 20
  Canada now has an official day to celebrate agriculture - February 16, 2017.    Canada’s Agriculture Day is a “time to celebrate and draw a closer connection between Canadians, our food and the people who produce it,” according to its creator, Agriculture More than Ever The day marks the first time the industry has dedicated a day to celebrating agriculture and the people in the industry.  It was announced on June 1, the final day of the Canadian Centre for Food Integrity (CCFI) Public Trust Summit in Ottawa. Candace Hill, manager of Agriculture More Than Ever, said in a release Canada’s Agriculture Day complements the industry-led initiative that has attracted more than 470 partner organizations and 2,100 individuals committed to creating positive perceptions of agriculture. Agriculture More Than Ever’s goal is to encourage those involved in agriculture to speak up and speak positively about the industry. “It’s all about showing our love, pride and passion for an industry that puts food on our tables,” Hill says. “We want to give everyone the opportunity to have a voice in the conversation and celebrate the industry that feeds the world.” “We all eat food yet many people don’t automatically make the connection between what’s on their plate and the commitment and care that goes into raising livestock, growing crops or processing food,” says Crystal Mackay, CEO of Farm & Food Care Canada, a national charity committed to building public trust and confidence in food and farming in Canada. “Every link in the food production chain – from the farm to the grocery store and restaurant – plays a vital role in bringing food to your table every day,” says Mackay, whose group organized the summit. “Canada’s Agriculture Day is an opportunity to get involved, celebrate and be a part of the conversation about food and farming.” Hill encourages the industry, organizations and individuals to come up with their own ideas and activities to promote and celebrate Canadian agriculture. Resources and ideas on how individuals and organizations can do that are available on the Canada’s Agriculture Day website, It’s a much-needed initiative, particularly given the lack of understanding by consumers on how their food is produced.  At the summit, CCFI released the results of a survey that showed 93 per cent of Canadians say they know little or nothing about farming.   That’s a staggering statistic, but there is some hope — the research also showed that two-thirds of Canadians want to know more about Canada’s food system and where there food comes from.  “We see a big opportunity ahead of us,” Mackay said in a release.  “The time is now to open up more dialogue and increase opportunities for credible conversations about our food in Canada.” She says the new CCFI will serve as a “critical hub to help the Canadian food system better understand the public’s questions and concerns and determine how to bridge the gap that currently exists between farm gates and dinner plates.” Farmers can also play a part.  Although I’ve heard numerous farmers say they are not comfortable being a public relations spokesperson for their respective industries, opportunities do exist for “agvocacy” that allow a person to stay within his or her comfort zone.  Check out the resources available at and visit for more information on the CCFI and the key findings from the Canadian Public Trust research – it’s sure to inspire.       
  June 27, 2016 - Perdue Foods announced June 27 a four-part a plan that it feels will accelerate its progress in animal care, strengthen relationships with farmers, build trust with multiple stakeholder groups and create an animal care culture for continued improvement. Titled 2016 and Beyond: Next Generation of Perdue Commitments to Animal Care, the plan was developed with input from stakeholders such as farmers, academics and leaders of animal advocate organizations who were invited by Perdue to help shape this progressive animal care plan that sets new industry standards. “As we continue to learn about innovative and better ways to raise animals through our No Antibiotics Ever journey and our experience in raising organic chickens, we are adopting a four-part plan which will result in changing how we raise chickens,” said Chairman Jim Perdue. “Transparency is very important to Perdue consumers, who are interested knowing how we raise, care for and harvest our chickens. Our vision is to be the most trusted name in food and agricultural products and animal care is a big part of that journey.” “Poultry production as a whole has made great progress in keeping chickens healthy; however, we can improve by implementing policies that go beyond meeting chickens’ basic needs.  We want to create an environment where chickens can express normal behaviors,” said Bruce Stewart-Brown, DVM, Perdue’s senior vice president of food safety, quality and live production. “Over the past five years, we’ve been exposed to and learned some husbandry techniques associated with organic production.  And, through the brands that have recently joined our company, we’ve been able to learn from some of the pioneers of a more holistic approach to animal well-being. When we talked to farmers they responded very positively to these improved husbandry methods.  In addition, we hear from consumers that how animals raised for food are treated is important to them.”  The first major company to commit to implementing such progressive practices in raising and harvesting animals system-wide, Perdue’s Commitments to Animal Care goes well beyond most other companies’ commitments to encompass not only the animals but the people who care for and handle them, as well as stakeholders who have an interest in this area. Perdue’s four Commitments to Animal Care The Perdue Commitments to Animal Care summarizes current progress and details next generation initiatives for each part of the plan. Perdue is putting program measurements in place, including audits by third parties, and will release an annual report announcing its progress in reaching specific goals.  Specifically the four-part plan commits to: The wants and needs of the animals Based on The Five Freedoms, an internationally recognized standard for animal husbandry, Perdue’s commitment document lays out where the company is today on each of the five aspects as well as future goals. For instance, the majority of chickens today are raised in fully enclosed barns without natural light.  Perdue is committed to retrofitting 200 chicken houses with windows by the end of 2016 to compare bird health and activity to enclosed housing.    The farmers that raise the chickens Appreciating that chickens spend most of their time in the care of farmers, the plan stresses improved relationships with farmers.  This includes creating an open dialogue about best practices in animal care, considering the farmer’s well-being and connecting animal care to pay and incentives.  Openness, transparency and trust The plan also calls for Perdue to be open to criticism of its current policies and procedures when deserved, share information about animal care initiatives, and proactively engage with a wide variety of animal welfare stakeholders, including advocates, academics and animal care experts.  A journey of continuous improvement The fourth part of the plan commits to ongoing learning and advancements in the company’s animal care programs to ensure the health and well-being of its birds through next-generation initiatives. This commitment will be driven by Perdue’s active Animal Care Council, which has been in place for more than 15 years.   “Our four commitments have one goal and that is continued improvement in animal care. We know we’re not where we want to be yet but we want to allow others to take the journey with us,” said Stewart-Brown. “From lessons learned from organic chicken houses, it’s clear that there can be a general health benefit with increased activity—and that is a big focus of our plan.  Short-term goals that support increased activity include window installations in 200 existing poultry houses by the end of 2016 and studying the role of enrichments such as perches and bales of hay to encourage activity.  Our goal is to double the activity of our chickens in the next three years.”  
Oct. 14, 2016 - Monitoring the migration routes of wild birds could help to provide early warning of potential bird flu outbreaks, experts say. The recommendation follows new research that shows migrating birds can help to spread deadly strains of avian flu around the world.Lethal strainsSome strains of bird flu viruses are highly lethal in birds they infect and pose a major threat to poultry farms worldwide. In rare cases, the viruses can also infect people and cause life-threatening illness.Asia outbreakResearchers investigated how a subtype of bird flu called H5N8 spread around the world following outbreaks in South Korea that began in early 2014. The virus spread to Japan, North America and Europe, causing outbreaks in birds there between autumn 2014 and spring 2015.Migration patternsScientists analysed migration patterns of wild birds that were found to be infected with the H5N8 virus. The team then compared the genetic code of viruses isolated from infected birds collected from 16 different countries.Long-distance flightTheir findings reveal that H5N8 was most likely carried by long-distance flights of infected migrating wild birds from Asia to Europe and North America via their breeding grounds in the Arctic. The researchers say their findings reinforce the importance of maintaining strict exclusion areas around poultry farms to keep wild birds out."Bird flu is a major threat to the health and wellbeing of farmed chickens worldwide,"  says Samantha Lycett with the University of Edinburgh. "Our findings show that with good surveillance, rapid data sharing and collaboration, we can track how infections spread across continents." SurveillanceGreater surveillance of wild birds at known breeding areas could help to provide early warning of threats of specific flu virus strains to birds and people, they add. Deadly bird flu strains – known as Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) – can kill up to 100 per cent of the birds they infect within a few days. The study was conducted by the Global Consortium for H5N8 and Related Influenza Viruses and involved scientists from 32 institutions worldwide.This study could only have happened through bird flu researchers around the world pooling resources and working together," adds Mark Woolhouse, also with the University of Edinburgh. "We see this as a model for how scientists should unite to combat infectious diseases of all kinds.Global studyThe study is published in the journal Science and was funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, COMPARE. The Roslin Institute receives strategic funding from the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council.
July 25, 2016 - The H5 avian influenza A virus that devastated North American poultry farms in 2014-15 was initially spread by migratory waterfowl, but evidence suggests such highly pathogenic flu viruses do not persist in wild birds. St. Jude Children's Research Hospital led the research, which appears online this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. While wild ducks and other aquatic birds are known to be natural hosts for low pathogenic flu viruses associated with milder symptoms, the results of this study indicate that is not the case with the highly pathogenic flu viruses that are associated with more severe illness. The research suggests that wild ducks and other aquatic birds are not an ongoing source of highly pathogenic flu infection in domestic poultry. "The findings provide a scientific basis for the decision by officials to use culling and quarantines to stop the 2014-15 outbreak in domestic poultry," said corresponding author Robert Webster, Ph.D., an emeritus member of the St. Jude Department of Infectious Diseases. "Now, research is needed to identify the mechanism that has evolved in these wild birds to disrupt the perpetuation of highly pathogenic influenza." | READ MORE.
July 15, 2016 - The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is continuing its investigation into an avian influenza situation near St. Catharines, Ontario. There remains one single premises confirmed to be infected with avian influenza, which is a commercial duck farm. The Agency has established an Avian Influenza Control Zone that covers a 3 km boundary from this farm. All other premises located within this zone, as well as other high risk-contact premises have been placed under quarantine. The Agency is continuing surveillance and testing within the zone to determine whether there is any additional evidence of avian influenza. To date, all of this testing has been negative.  The Agency continues to monitor this situation closely. The Avian Influenza Control Zone remains in effect until further notice. 
July 7, 2016- Preliminary testing by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) has confirmed the presence of H5 avian influenza on a duck farm near St. Catharines, Ontario as a low pathogenic subtype. Pathogenicity refers to the severity of the illness caused in birds. Further testing by the CFIA is underway to confirm the precise subtype and strain of the virus. Results are expected within days.  The CFIA has placed the farm under quarantine to control disease spread and will determine a surrounding surveillance zone for further testing and movement control measures. The industry sector has been notified to adopt enhanced biosecurity practices.  All birds on the infected premises will be humanely euthanized and disposed of,in accordance with provincial environmental regulations and internationally accepted disease control guidelines, and the Province of Ontario will provide technical support on required carcass disposal. Once all birds have been removed, the CFIA will oversee the cleaning and disinfection of the barns, vehicles, equipment and tools to eliminate any infectious material that may remain.  On behalf of the four feather boards in Ontario, the Feather Board Command Centre (FBCC) has issued a heightened biosecurity advisory to all industry personnel operating in the Niagara, Ontario Region. Stakeholders are being asked to implement heightened biosecurity if working on farms or travelling through this area. This includes (but is not limited to): • wearing boots, protection suits, hats and gloves/hand washing; • all deliveries/loading should be the last on the route; and • wash and disinfect the truck’s undercarriage and steps before proceeding with any other delivery/loading. A Producer Advisory is being distributed by staff from the various Boards to all commercial producers registered small flock growers in this Niagara Region. Should you be aware of health concerns in flocks you deal with, please advise the farmer to contact their veterinarian, as well as their Board or call 1-877-SOS-BYRD. Updates will be provided through the FBCC website at There you will find the most current incident status information.
April 29, 2016 - In early 2016 Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) was identified in commercial poultry flocks in the United States (U.S.) and Mexico. Wild birds, known carriers of the influenza virus, are believed to be the source of the outbreak in the U.S. These outbreaks highlight the importance of biosecurity. Wild birds are now in migration. As a result, the health of commercial poultry and small flocks is at risk. Avian influenza spreads when wild birds and people (carrying viruses on their hands, boots, tires etc.) come into contact with commercial/small flocks. Producers and small flock owners are encouraged to check their biosecurity plans to stop disease from flying, walking or rolling into their flock. Farm staff and service providers who are unwell also pose a risk to flock health. Recently two Canadian commercial poultry flocks tested positive for the H1N1 influenza virus. The H1N1 influenza virus causes human respiratory illness and can be transmitted to poultry. In poultry, the infection may go unnoticed, or it may cause mild respiratory illness and decreased egg production. Although the impact of H1N1 is less severe than HPAI, prevention is important to minimize the potential for new viruses to develop in the bird population. Anyone with respiratory illnesses should avoid contact with poultry. For information on influenza and human health refer to the Public Health Agency of Canada. Commercial poultry producers and small poultry flock owners are encouraged to protect their flocks by checking their biosecurity plans and making sure that their plans are practiced every day. For more information, please see our webpage: Protecting Your Flock from Influenza – Have You Got It Right? For more information on biosecurity, visit  
  February 6th, 2004, British Columbia - the first Canadian avian influenza outbreak. By April 5, 2004, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency had ordered 19 million birds euthanized on many farms across the Fraser Valley. In the years to come – 2007, 2008, 2014 and 2015 – other Canadian outbreaks of this extremely contagious zoonotic disease (H5 and H7 types) followed.  Tracking the spread of such a disease is, to put it mildly, not easy. Anecdotally, during the late 2014 outbreak in B.C., it took 40 people three months to nail down who had visited which farms, the farms they had visited after that, who had been on those farms, where they had gone afterwards and so on. There was also the need to find out which vehicles had been used, because sometimes vehicles have multiple drivers. There had to be a better way. Enter Tim Nelson, who at the time was working at the Poultry Industry Council. Nelson was keen to create a reliable and lightning fast method to track people and vehicles during an emergency, thereby efficiently preventing the spread of disease. But how? “We have visitor record books on each farm, but as we saw in B.C., it’s impossible to collate the information in them in any meaningful way, even if you had a lot of time,” Nelson notes. “You have to use technology. We looked into having the people and vehicles that visit farms getting RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) tags, but that would require every farm to have a $5000 RFID reader, and would rely on everyone using it all the time. Then we looked at tracking visitors through GPS on smartphones, but people don’t want their every movement tracked and I don’t blame them.” The answer, Nelson thought, would be a system that still uses the GPS on smartphones and tablets, but one that’s only alerted when you visit a farm. That way, the privacy of a person’s other movements would be completely protected. Even better would be a system wherein an individual visitor’s or farm’s identity would only be accessed in an emergency. At that point in time (2010), “geo-fencing” (mapping of the geographical boundary of a property using GPS) was already available, but only two companies in North America were doing it. Nelson approached one and began working with its staff to build a system that would not only store information on when users entered a geo-fenced farm tproperty, but a system that, in an emergency, could instantly cross-reference and analyze many movements, producing information that could immediately be acted on. This task took Nelson and several software engineers the better part of two years. “It seems simple, but it’s a complex database that has to analyze a large amount of data,” Nelson says. “Also, part of what took so long to build the app was that it had to be available on three platforms – BlackBerry, Androids and IOS.” But finally, there it was. Something that could do, in moments, what took 40 people three months to do in B.C. last winter – and much, much more. HOW IT WORKSAnyone with the free “Be Seen Be Safe” app on their smartphone or tablet automatically triggers a signal the moment they enter a geo-fenced property. The farmer receives an immediate notification of who has come on-farm. In addition, anytime they like, farmers can check farm visitor records (basically, it’s their online visitor record book) from a secure personal login. The database stores farm visit information that includes visitor ID, contact number, previous farms visited (risk assessment level), time in and time out. The person who is visiting the farm property is “greeted” through the app with a welcome message. The identity of individual visitors and farms are not accessible except by system administrators, and only come into play in an emergency. Every data packet is encrypted. In a disease outbreak (starting with a specific flagged farm), visitor information is analyzed according to given parameters and mapped to predict disease spread in real time. Things like wind direction, wind speed, temperature, humidity and so on are overlaid onto the map. To contain the outbreak, farmers and visitors receive immediate notifications by text message so they can implement enhanced biosecurity measures. “The system is no more intrusive on user privacy than a farm visitor log book,” Nelson says. “Data on visits is permanently deleted after a year. There is no battery drain with the app, as it only runs for a split second when one’s device crosses a geo-fenced property, and the data exchanges are extremely small, so users won’t notice any usage increase.” UP AND RUNNINGIn 2014, Nelson tried the app out with about 100 people (company reps and other industry personnel) and by May 2015, he and his team had worked out the bugs. In October 2015, a two-year “Be Seen Be Safe”poultry project was launched, involving every producer belonging to Egg Farmers of Ontario, the Ontario Broiler Hatching Egg & Chick Commission and the Turkey Farmers of Ontario (almost 900 farms). These associations have paid the first two years’ cost for each farm for initial geo-fencing and monitoring, and 75 per cent of that cost is being reimbursed by a federal government grant through Growing Forward 2.     At this point, the geo-fencing is done, and each farmer in the project is receiving an email with the farm and its geo-fence marked on a map. Once the farmer validates the farm/geo-fence location and provides a few more details, such as other livestock present on the farm, things go “live.” Each farmer will receive two “Be Seen Be Safe” farm gate signs (or more, if required) to introduce the program, as well as informational packages to give to those who regularly or occasionally visit the farm. “Farmers can start accessing farm visit records online from day one,” says Nelson. “We are asking that all those who come on a farm and also visit other farms – such as egg collectors, vets, feed and pullet deliverers, catchers, vaccination crews and so on – to sign on, to download the app and if applicable, to talk to us about having their vehicle GPS information on the system.” Nelson says the more service providers on the system, the more complete the network and the better the chance of preventing disease spread. “Be Seen Be Safe” is currently looking at modelling on-farm visitor movement in order to predict the movement of service providers who do not want to be part of the system. However, Nelson says, “I can’t understand anyone not wanting to be part of this. It’s free to service providers and suppliers and let’s face it, preventing disease spreading in agriculture is of huge benefit to everyone. We all earn a living from it.” In the event of an outbreak, text message emergency alerts can be programmed to make a noise when they arrive on a device, thus alerting the user to look at his or her phone or tablet. Beyond that point, however, the system does not currently ask that emergency outbreak texts be responded to. This means the system – and the industry association system administrator in question – has no way of “knowing” that emergency alerts have been received and that people are acting accordingly. Nelson has thought about this, and is looking into how the system could facilitate follow-up. FARM HEALTH MONITORAlong with “Be Seen Be Safe,” Nelson and business partner Joel Sotomayor have developed “Farm Health Monitor” (FHM), which is available on a limited basis right now. Nelson calls it a social networking platform for diseases. If symptoms or bird deaths are noted on a particular farm, the farmer can input this information into the system, which has mapping and analysis capability. If two or more farms within a given radius report similar information, a warning will be sent out to every related farm (poultry, for example) in that region, but as with “Be Seen Be Safe,” the identities of individual farms always stay protected. “The warning will prompt farmers to check their flocks carefully, keep a close eye over the next few days, and report if necessary,” Nelson says. “It’s a true early warning system. Poultry vets will also be alerted, and can also alert one another through the system.” Nelson says he developed FHM because, catastrophic outbreaks aside, it’s very important in his opinion that producers have an efficient system for containing and managing production-limiting diseases. “We have no idea how much these types of diseases cost, how they spread,” he says. “They are not tracked at present. So, if we can get a handle on this and reduce the impact and perhaps prevent them from reaching more farms, that could save a lot of time, money and stress on birds and people.”    For more information, visit: and    
November 4, 2015 - On October 30 Chore-Time celebrated a ribbon-cutting ceremony to mark the official opening of its $7.1 million building expansion. Milford and county officials who helped cut the ribbon included Milford Town Council members Bob Cockburn and Doug Ruch, along with George Robertson from Kosciusko Economic Development Corporation, Bob Jackson, County Commissioner and Alyssa Lowe from the Kosciusko Chamber of Commerce.  Also participating in the ribbon cutting were Dan Robinson, Brent Robinson and Dan Reynolds from Robinson Construction, company personnel from Chore-Time and CTB, and local media. The expansion features 45,000 square feet (4,180 square meters) of floor space, five new truck docks and a new truck drive along the north side of the Chore-Time plant.  Six new fabrication machines were purchased as part of the project along with a variety of material handling and assembly fixtures and warehouse racks.   The addition to Chore-Time’s existing facilities in Milford was designed to improve the flow of raw materials into the building and the efficiency of manufacturing processes and delivery performance. As the project progressed, Chore-Time added approximately 80 full-time employees to its ranks.  A celebration event for Chore-Time employees is planned later in 2015. The expansion project was announced in late 2014 with ground breaking taking place soon afterwards.  The new space brings Chore-Time’s total square footage in Milford to 395,000 square feet (36,700 square meters).   Employees, machinery and inventory moved into the new space in July and August, and the project is now essentially complete.  A few finishing touches, such as landscaping, are still planned. “This ribbon cutting marks the culmination of a wonderful team effort,” said Chris Stoler, Executive Vice president and General Manager for the Chore-Time Group. “I’d like to extend my thanks to all the Chore-Time team members who have worked so hard and demonstrated such great teamwork.” “The completion of the building compliments the efforts of the whole team to increase the efficiency of our customer fulfillment process,” he added.  “This effort will continue in the months and years ahead, as we strive to further optimize and enhance the way we supply products and services globally.  Our goal is continuous improvement in how we meet customer needs and support the growth in global demand for Chore-Time’s poultry, egg and pig production systems.” Jeff Miller, Operations Manager for Chore-Time, noted that the town of Milford, Kosciusko County and the State of Indiana contributed economic incentives to facilitate the Chore-Time expansion in Milford. He also thanked the team at Robinson Construction and the many others involved in the project. “The construction team worked through 63 days of snow and rain,” said Miller. “We appreciate the extra efforts that weather issues required.”   
  Residents throughout the Northwest Territories (NWT) are flocking to the Northern Farm Training Institute (NFTI) in Hay River to learn how to grow crops. The challenge is finding enough productive land in their communities to pursue agricultural endeavors. That’s where Hay River-based egg producer, Choice North Farms, and its plan to convert its poultry manure into compost could play a vital role to help develop productive soils in many northern communities. Kim Rapati, NFTI Operations Manager and former Hay River Regional Manager for an environmental advocacy group called Ecology North says that compost is a highly valued commodity in the North because there is so little arable land available in the region to pursue farming ventures in or near the region’s many small communities. Addition of compost to what she described as ‘young soils’ will provide community members with the opportunity to establish and develop their farming skills. “The composting venture was initiated by us,” says Kevin Wallington, Choice North Farms sales and marketing representative. “In past years, there had been studies done on old poultry sites to see if there was any feasibility in it. But I don’t think there was really a will on the industry side. It really has to be championed by industry to participate in a venture like this.” The farm houses about 117,000 laying hens producing about 37 million eggs and 3500 tonnes of manure per year near Hay River. It is working with Ecology North, the NWT government, federal government, NFTI and Town of Hay River on its composting venture. The plan is to start with a 160 cubic metre pilot scale site involving the use of about nine tonnes of manure this summer to test various mixing methods and outcomes, with the goal of developing a full scale site consisting of an area of about 18,000 cubic metres as a commercial composting operation hopefully by next summer. Choice North Farms is owned and managed by Glen Wallington, and his son, Michael. They own part of the operation, and manage another part for a separate egg producer, but all under one roof. They started producing eggs under the Choice North Farms label about three years ago and are among the largest egg producers in NWT as well as being a supporter of the ‘Polar Egg’ initiative. Since 2012, the Polar Egg Company has been certified to grade eggs locally so that not all eggs are shipped to southern markets but also supplied for human consumption in retail stores in the North. Kevin Wallington is also Glen’s son, as well as sales and marketing director for Polar Egg. At present, their raw manure is collected on plastic conveyor belts and removed from the barns daily, representing about one dump truck load per day that is transported to a designated landfill area 22 kilometers from the barns. The objective of the composting project is to mix raw poultry manure with waste paper and wood. The paper and wood are necessary as part of the conversion process to produce compost. Because of that, Kevin says they are in discussions with governments such as the City of Yellowknife and Town of Hay River, as well as industries dealing with waste paper, such as paper shredding companies and the Yellowknife newspaper, to discuss possible alliances in the composting venture. The concept is to establish an open-turned windrow system where the manure, paper and wood are piled into five metre wide by three metre tall windrows. At full scale operation, 3420 tonnes of poultry manure generated by the egg farm will be combined with 2800 tonnes of paper and 500 tonnes of wood to produce about 3400 cubic metres of compost annually. One of the benefits of composting is that through biological activity, it reduces the volume of the raw materials, and produces a marketable, pathogen and weed-free compost that can be used as a soil amendment in a variety of growing environments. Either a wheel loader or pile turner could be used to turn the piles as needed to improve air flow and encourage the conversion process. Not only does Choice North Farms want to convert their current production of manure, but also to use the thousands of tonnes of poultry manure that they have accumulated in their nearby landfill over the past 15 years. “This project is a benefit to us because if we didn’t compost, then effectively the landfill becomes a liability for us,” says Kevin. “Some of those pits are fairly deep and I don’t think you’d have to dig too low below the surface to find that it is fairly fresh after it’s been there for some time.” He adds that there are no issues with the landfill currently, “but I know that the government is excited about our project because the North is full of stories where people just walked away from things.” Wallington says that the egg producer had no experience with composting and that is a major benefit that Ecology North has brought to the partnership, providing the technical know-how needed to launch a composting venture. Savings in diverting paper waste from the Hay River landfill to the poultry farm composting site is estimated at almost 14,000 cubic metres of space, and at $150 per cubic metre, that is a savings of just over $2 million per year. The project costs of establishing the site were estimated at about $350,000, with additional capital costs of $459,000 and annual operating costs of nearly $136,000. To recover those costs, it is estimated that there is the potential to generate just over $235,000 per year in compost sales at $70 per tonne, with the sales and marketing handled by Choice North Farms. The egg producer has been speaking to the NWT government for a couple of years about acquiring a fresh parcel of land for the composting site, separate from its existing manure management landfill. It is located about 300 metres from the stockpiled manure in the landfill for easy access. From a technical standpoint, poultry manure is high in nitrogen and phosphorus and requires the addition of carbon for the overall composting process to work. Choice North Farms is relying on the mentorship and experience provided by Ecology North and is also working with a laboratory in Yellowknife to establish the proper mix to produce high quality compost as an end product. Rapati says that despite the sub-arctic temperatures in northern Canada, it is possible to produce high quality compost, but it takes longer because the air temperature does not stay warm for as long as areas further south. The temperature in the windrows is required to achieve at least 55 degrees Celsius for 15 days and turned five times to ensure that the conversion is complete. Producing compost is more of a time management process in the North adapted to suit local conditions. Rapati says the conversion to marketable compost could probably be managed in one season. The frequency of turning and adding moisture to the piles depends on air temperature, airflow and moisture content readings to encourage uniform conversion is taking place within the piles. One advantage of composting in the North is that it has the space to conduct open-windrow composting and because of its sparse population, there are few if any odor complaints. Kevin says Choice North Farms is excited about the opportunity and eager to get started. “This is going to be business-driven, probably supported by various organizations, including the government,” says Kevin. “At the end of the day we would like to have a product that we can sell and use in the North for everything ranging from expansion of agriculture to reclamation and for municipal uses as well.”      
 Finding a way of turning poultry bedding into a valuable resource in a cost-effective way is difficult. But it didn’t stop B.C. Agriculture Research and Development Corporation (ARDCorp), B.C. Sustainable Poultry Farming Group (SPFG), Ritchie-Smith Feeds and Diacarbon Energy, from trying.  The groups optimistically embarked on a trial to turn this material back into fodder. Anyone who works in B.C.’s poultry industry is aware that a creative, cost-effective disposal solution is required for the excess volumes of used poultry bedding accumulating from the over 100 million chickens and turkeys produced annually. Finding a way of turning this abundance of bedding into a valuable resource is even harder. But that was the goal of the B.C. Agriculture Research and Development Corporation (ARDCorp), B.C. Sustainable Poultry Farming Group (SPFG), Ritchie-Smith Feeds and Diacarbon Energy, who optimistically embarked on a trial to turn this material back into fodder. Used poultry bedding has been used for centuries as a soil fertilizer. But only so much of the bedding can be used on the land before the nutrients start leaching into the environment, becoming a risk rather than an asset. With a relatively low moisture content of 30 to 40 per cent, it is possible to transport broiler litter to nutrient deficient areas for land application. However, on average, a tonne of broiler litter contains less than 200 lbs of nitrogen, phosphate and potash, while a tonne of commercial fertilizer contains over 700 lbs. Due to its low nutrient content to weight ratio (when compared to commercial fertilizer), it is often uneconomical to transportation broiler litter over long distances. While this distance depends heavily upon transportation costs and the cost of commercial fertilizer, a good rule of thumb is that broiler litter should be used within 50 to 100 kilometres of the source. For the Lower Mainland, which raises close to ninety per cent of B.C.’s poultry, the current nutrient surplus is a concern. The poultry sector’s quest for a viable alternative to the land application of bedding was the reason for this recent feed study. In other parts of the world, some success has been achieved with turning used broiler bedding into biochar and adding it to broiler feed, thereby improving the broiler’s feed conversion and increasing final weight. Fueled by the success of others, ARDCorp, the SPFG and the Ministry of Agriculture hoped that through conducting their own experiment, they could create demand for roughly ten per cent of the used broiler bedding in the Lower Mainland; and, at the same time, improve production. Biochar is made by burning biomass material at extreme temperatures of over 500C in an oxygen-free environment. This process, called pyrolysis (thermochemical decomposition), is a very effective disinfection technique, ensuring that the biochar is free of any possible pathogens. When applied to soils, the high surface area and porosity of biochar act as a catalyst for plant growth by helping to retain water and by providing a habitat for beneficial microorganisms to flourish. More recently, there has been interest in how biochar aids in the grinding process and provides a habitat for beneficial microoganisms in the digestive system.  It has been claimed that the consumption of biochar by broilers can increase update of foodstuffs and the energy contained within them.  Increased uptake can thus result in increased weight gain and/or improved feed conversion. Although the idea of supplementing broiler feed with biochar made from broiler litter may seem strange, it should be noted that processed poultry litter has been used as a feed ingredient for almost 40 years in the U.S. For this study, used broiler bedding was taken from a commercial broiler barn in the Fraser Valley and dried before being delivered to Diacarbon’s pyrolysis unit in Agassiz. Once processed, the resulting biochar was transported to Ritchie-Smith Feeds in Abbotsford where it was incorporated into commercial starter, grower and finisher broiler feed. The feed was delivered to S.J. Ritchie Research Farms Ltd in Abbotsford for a floor pen study. The study involved 288 broiler chicks arbitrarily placed into twenty-four specially constructed pens. The chicks in each pen were given feed supplemented with biochar or feed without biochar for 35 days. The broilers were weighed individually once weekly and the weights recorded. All feed was also weighed weekly and any feed remaining in the feeders was weighed back and replaced. Unfortunately, the hoped-for outcomes of the study did not come to pass. From the results of this study it can be concluded that supplementing broiler feed with broiler litter biochar had no statistically significant impact on broiler weight gain and/or feed conversion (Table 1). While unknown as to why, it could be because of the nutrients in broiler litter; a result of the droppings and spilled feed that gets mixed in with the bedding material. It is therefore possible that the supplementation of broiler litter biochar resulted in the broilers being feed too high levels of certain nutrients. This assumption would go some way to explain the high levels of Sodium (Na) and Chlorine (Cl) found in the litter from T2 and T3 pens (Table 2). In other studies that have found significant benefits from supplementing broiler feed with biochar, other feedstocks were used to make the biochar; including oak, pine, coconut shells, corn cobs and peanut hulls. It is therefore possible that had an alternative feedstock be used (such as pine instead of broiler litter), supplementing broiler feed with biochar may have been a statistically significant impact on broiler weight gain and/or feed conversion. Future OpportunitiesWhile the biochar feed study might have ruled out one opportunity, it has opened doors for others. The main objective, after all, is to find sustainable ways of managing used broiler bedding. And if supplementing broiler feed with broiler bedding biochar did not work as expected, then the question should be: where can the industry look next? Allen James, Chair of ARDCorp, and a member of the SPFG hopes researchers can find a positive way to convert the poultry bedding into energy. “As long as there’s an excess of bedding, we’ll be looking for a solution.” He is hopeful we will find a local solution to our local situation. Other applications of biochar have proved successful, but perhaps not economically feasible for the Lower Mainland. Biochar has been used as a soil conditioner to improve water retention and nutrient density to aid in the growth of plants and increase yield. Biochar is also considered a superior growing medium in hydroponics, which is a rapidly growing technology. All of these areas could be expanded upon, creating financial opportunities for the poultry industry. “Many studies have been done in the U.S,” explains James, “but none of them relate to B.C. and our particular situation. We’ll keep pressing on as long as the industry has this situation to deal with.” For B.C., a new study is planned for 2015 to convert poultry litter into heat and electricity. This project could potentially have positive impacts on both the environment and animal waste management, and be one solution to how we can turn trash into treasure. We will have to wait for the results to come in, and look forward to future projects, which will help answer the burning question. Any inquiries about this study and requests for details should be directed ARDCorp’s Senior Program Manager Jaclyn Laic (604) 854-4483.  Funding for this project has been provided by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the B.C. Ministry of Agriculture through the Canada-B.C. Agri-Innovation Program under Growing Forward 2, a federal-provincial-territorial initiative. The program is delivered by the Investment Agriculture Foundation of B.C.    
  Actual chicken growers as action movie stars fighting the use of hormones and steroids in the production of B.C. and Canadian chicken? That’s the unlikely premise of the Chicken Squad, a recent social media campaign by the B.C. Chicken Growers Association (BCCGA) and the B.C. Chicken Marketing Board. “We started working on the program three years ago,” says BCCGA president Ravi Bathe. “Our association directors talked a lot about how we talk to the public about things they are concerned about. Three years later, here we are.” Bathe plays the primary “good guy” in the series of ten YouTube videos and an action movie “trailer” which can be viewed at BCCMB director Kerry Froese acted as the main “villain” while other growers from both the Lower Mainland and the Okanagan took parts as supporting members of the cast. Even Chicken Farmers of Canada chair David Janzen appears in a cameo role as the good guys’ mentor. A total of about 15 growers and their families participated. The short videos include “auditions” for the movie, grower interviews, outtakes and, of course, the movie trailer. Even though the videos were shot in mid-winter and included a rather chilly scene where several end up in a backyard pool, the growers had a blast. “I’m now looking to Hollywood,” one joked, claiming “I’ve already turned down several offers.” Relevention Marketing, the public relations and marketing firm contracted to co-ordinate the project shares their enthusiasm. “The most rewarding part of the process was working with real chicken farmers and seeing the relationships and friendships which developed,” says Relevention marketing strategist Steffan Janzen. “To ask them to do something vulnerable and be able to laugh at themselves was great.” Reaching ConsumersThe program is based on consumer misconceptions about the use of hormones and steroids in chicken production. “The most concerning statistic is how many consumers believe chicken contains hormones and steroids,” Janzen says, noting a recent survey showed 64 per cent of British Columbians believe that. The videos therefore clearly spell out that the use of hormones and steroids to produce chicken in Canada has been banned for 50 years. Misconceptions are particularly prevalent among the young. “We looked at the issue of trust between consumers and farmers. Do consumers trust the people who are growing their food?” Janzen asks, adding “there was a direct correlation between age and the level of trust. The younger the consumer, the less the trust.” He says the campaign’s aim was to “increase the level of trust among younger urban consumers,” calling them “a highly skeptical group.” They are also difficult to reach using traditional media, which is why a YouTube campaign was selected. “Social media is becoming the norm now so we wanted to harness it,” Bathe says. He would not reveal how much the campaign cost, but insists “the benefits outweighed the cost.” Although it was funded in part by provincial Buy Local funding Bathe notes the campaign was already being developed before the funding program was announced. By the end of June, the videos had attracted a total of 175,000 views. The campaign also led to appearances on major Vancouver television and radio stations and interviews in many urban papers. “It’s about making people aware that we have all these programs,” Bathe says. “Part of the purpose is to build goodwill so when something happens there’s a level of comfort among consumers,” Janzen says, adding there is opportunity to do more with the material developed for the campaign. That is something growers are considering. “We are looking at the next steps,” Bathe says. “We hope to do more things like this in future.”    
Although the Canadian poultry industry doesn’t have a formal sustainability plan, existing on-farm programs and planning speak to sustainability  Sustainability is simply long-term thinking, making sure we look after tomorrow while we look after today. Farmers already know this: unless farming is balanced on the three pillars of sustainability — looking after the environmental, economic and social needs of production — long-term viability will not be ensured. But to consumers, sustainability has now become a buzzword. They are starting to realize that at our current global population growth rate we’re faced with a potential need to feed 9 billion people by 2050. At the rate we’re going, we will eat our planet. Water, soil, energy, all can be easily depleted but not so easily replaced. While farming practices and scientific advances will contribute to higher production, we will end up bankrupt if we don’t plan to use our natural resources wisely. Under increasing consumer pressure it may no longer be good enough to just practice sustainable production — you may have to prove it. Is this an opportunity or a restriction? What does the actual word “sustainability” mean to the future of farming? A CASE STUDY: ONTARIO AQUACULTUREFor fish farmers, sustainability is already a household word. By the mid-1990s, aquaculture was already implementing world-class standards. Fish farmers realized early that demonstrating sustainability would be critical to their industry, not only to maintaining and growing their market, but also to look after their natural and social resources. While farm-raised fish now supply half of our global demand for human consumption, Karen Tracey, Executive Director of the Northern Ontario Aquaculture Association, told the audience at the 2014 Farm & Food Care Conference in Milton, Ont., that the demand for farmed fish will rise to 70 per cent of global market share by 2030. The media assault that resulted from heightened food safety fears was the original driver of sustainability in aquaculture, said Tracey. While food scares were easily fuelled, they were not so easily corrected. Food retailers became the target of a strategic focus on the marketplace, where groups such as Greenpeace rated retailers according to their sustainability practices. Like it or not, this pressure can close doors in a hurry. Certification JungleRetailers, not wanting to be shamed, fed into what Tracey called a “seafood certification jungle” of more than 30 fishery and aquaculture labeling programs worldwide, which led to great confusion in the marketplace. Seventy to eighty per cent of these accredited standards contain the same criteria, but the confusion arose within the remaining twenty to thirty per cent — and this is where the labels tried to differentiate themselves. Tracey said when you meet one certification standard it’s not so hard to meet the others, but it causes a lot of confusion for all stakeholders — farmers, consumers, processors and retailers. Fish farmers knew that more regulations were not the answer. In Ontario, aquaculture is covered by more than 20 acts of legislation. The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources issues the fish-farming license but then defers regulation to others, such as the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Canadian Food Inspection Agency for fish health, or Transport Canada for farm siting in relation to navigation of waterways. In the marketplace, producers knew that a solid production framework had to be in place in order to compete globally. Pressure to become more sustainable wasn’t going to go away; it was only going to intensify. The best answer would be third-party audits and certification. At first the industry didn’t understand the rationale or cost surrounding this new word, sustainability. Surprisingly though, while certification was not initially embraced, it has turned out to be a positive experience. Facing Challenges“The biggest challenge for farmers was recording data,” said Tracey, “but once you get your mindset into it (third party certification), (farmers) found greater efficiencies at the farm level that they didn’t embrace before.” On the farm, underwater cameras now monitor feed consumption, reducing the amount of waste feed that supplies the benthic community of bugs and worms and wild fish that feast under the nets. In ocean fisheries, three-bay management is now standard, allowing for site recovery. Fallowing sites has been the subject of research by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, showing that site recovery occurs within a few months with absolutely no trace left after seven years. Technical improvements in containment pens have significantly reduced escapes, and fish health is increasing through the use of vaccines and brood stock screening, reducing the need for antibiotic use. The future will also embrace innovation and research into novel feeds and nutrient recycling. Tracey acknowledged that even though sustainability has become a part of everyday aquaculture there are still a lot of challenges ahead. She would like to reduce unnecessary duplication of efforts and conflicting requirements as well as increase buyer and consumer confidence through more consistent messaging. And in some cases, refute expectations of certain standards that are unreasonable. At a minimum, certification has maintained or increased market access, providing worldwide consumer assurance. Within the next three years a new Global Seafood Sustainability Initiative will attempt to assimilate the smorgasbord of sustainability certification into two or three global standards.   So if Tracey hit rewind, what would she say now? “Just jump right in and do it. If consumers are demanding it, be pro-active.” What about Poultry?Just jump in and do what? Fish can’t fly and poultry can’t swim. Does a consumer push for sustainability mean the same thing to aquaculture as it does to feather culture? Are there lessons to be learned? “We don’t talk about sustainability the same as aquaculture,” answered Lisa Bishop-Spencer, Communications Manager at the Chicken Farmers of Canada (CFC), “it’s an unspoken rule already.” In general comparison, farming implies some sort of intervention in a production cycle, allowing improvements such as feeding and predator protection for the stock or product being raised and ownership of the product. So in this context, fish and poultry are both farmed. In terms of market access, there isn’t the same international pressure on Canadian poultry that there is on fish. And for poultry, under supply management it’s the poultry farmers themselves, not the consumers, that have been leading the way. Strategic PlanThe CFC has a five-year strategic plan in place that looks at responsible stewardship, risk management, consumer-driven growth, value-chain efficiency, competitiveness and system management. The current evolutionary document covers 2014 through 2018, helping to identify and respond to the needs of consumers and producers. While the central thrust of the document does not include the word sustainability, it covers everything else from providing profitable industry growth, managing markets, and eliminating the preventive use of Class 1 antimicrobials to addressing media myths and public concerns. The strategic plan also includes moving forward with the On Farm Food Safety Assurance Program (OFFSAP), which has received full government recognition in compliance with HACCP rules. While there are variations among the provinces, at present, 95 per cent of poultry farmers meet compliance in Canada: they’ve passed the third party audit. “We are extremely good planners,” said Bishop-Spencer. There is a lot of protocol already in place. Over her 14 years with CFC, she is noticing that the government wants to regulate less, but someone has to take charge; the feather industry has taken a lead role rather than being told what to do. Having a strategic plan not only drives increased efficiency in the industry, but the plan also serves consumers, to offer them a wide choice of different brands and feeding protocols. “Whatever they want they can find it,” said Bishop-Spencer, although they may have to pay a premium. New labeling, set to launch this month, will brand fresh chicken, letting consumers know that a Canadian farmer raised it.  This designation will either appear as a label or be integrated into an existing label. That WordBut what about that word “sustainability”? How can poultry farmers prove to the consumer that their industry is looking after the future? It’s not enough to say “trust me” when the consumer is saying “show me.” Poultry farmers already have incredibly stringent record keeping with strong repercussions for non-compliance, Bishop-Spencer explained. “We don’t have a sustainability plan but I think it’s all there.” Ask any farmer and they’ll tell you they’re responsible to their land, their birds, their customers, the system that allows them to grow their birds, and ultimately, to their children, says Bishop-Spencer. “Sustainability means leaving a positive legacy and frankly, that’s something that just makes sense.”  
February 26, 2014 - Egg Farmers of Alberta (EFA) has announced the launch of a new environmental program, the first of its kind for egg farmers in Canada.   The Producer Environmental Egg Program (PEEP) is intended to help egg farmers better identify their impacts on the environment and facilitate the use of best practices.  This will help to ensure that resources are being managed in a sustainable manner and that the Alberta egg industry continues to be recognized as a source of fresh, high-quality local food, which is produced in an environmentally responsible manner. Egg farmers are already good stewards of the land, who are committed to environmental protection and sustainable development.  PEEP will build upon this foundation by providing information about impacts of on-farm activities and helping to establish goals for improvement.  The PEEP assessment is focused on key impact areas such as energy use, water consumption and manure management, which helps farmers identify and address environmental risks and opportunities, to improve their carbon footprint.   “Consumers, retailers and other stakeholders want to know that eggs are fresh and safe, and also produced in a sustainable fashion,” said Jenna Griffin, EFA’s Industry Development Officer.  “Given the egg industry has existing on-farm food safety and animal care programs, the development and delivery of an environmental program is a natural point of expansion.  PEEP will enable EFA to communicate the positive efforts being taken by farmers, and champion the cause when industry needs to take the lead on piloting solutions.”   Portions of PEEP have been derived from the Environmental Farm Plan (EFP), which is a more extensive program available to all agricultural producers across Alberta.  EFA believes that the key to effective environmental management is through a systematic approach to planning, controlling, measuring and improving environmental performance.  EFA will be able to track industry-wide trends and significant changes in egg farming practices over time, using a pioneering attitude to contribute to the long-term sustainability of Alberta’s egg industry.  

Subscription Centre

New Subscription
Already a Subscriber
Customer Service
View Digital Magazine Renew

Most Popular

Latest Events

2016 Agriculture Labour Summit
Wed Oct 26, 2016 @ 8:00AM - 04:30PM
Prairie Livestock Expo 216
Wed Dec 14, 2016 @ 9:00AM - 06:00PM
London Poultry Show
Wed Apr 05, 2017