Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-tj2md Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T14:30:51.425Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The effect of paddock rotation management on pasture damage by organic dry sows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2017

H Kelly
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU
H Browning
Affiliation:
Eastbrook Farm, Bishopstone, Swindon SN6 8PW
J Day
Affiliation:
ADAS Terrington, Terrington St Clement, Kings Lynn PE34 4PW
A Martins
Affiliation:
ADAS Terrington, Terrington St Clement, Kings Lynn PE34 4PW
S A Edwards
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU
Get access

Extract

Nose ringing is widely used in conventional outdoor pig production as the only reliable method of preventing sows destroying pasture by rooting (Edwards et al., 1998), but is prohibited by some organic sector bodies as it inhibits the sows’ behaviour. Some organic producers use a rotation policy in which the sows are moved to fresh pasture about three times a year, after green cover has been destroyed. As well as limiting nutrient leaching, frequent movement also limits parasite build-up in a system which prohibits the routine use of anthelmintics. However, it has a high labour demand. An alternative strategy is to maintain the sows on a larger area for the whole year. This abstract presents initial data on comparison of the two systems regarding annual pattern of pasture damage by sows.

Type
Poster Session I
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Edwards, S A, Jamieson, W, Riddoch, I, C A., Watson 1998. Effect of nose ringing and dietary modification in outdoor pig production on temporal changes in soil nitrogen status. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science. p42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar