Pork producers in the United States have had the global reputation of being low-cost, reliable suppliers for a long time. In fact, much of our technology has been exported. If you visit hog operations in most other pork-producing countries, the systems look a lot like what you see here because much of the building and feed technologies come from here. Many of the hogs will look like ours because essentially all the genetics companies are international in scope. So the United States has been dominant in its position as a world leader in the modern production of pigs. I hope we can hold that position.
You might ask why we would not be able to continue to be competitive with other protein sources in the U.S. or with other pork producers around the world. Most of our advances can be traced back to a leading edge in research and education. The fact that we have probably the highest level of animal health and the greatest knowledge of diseases (including their causes and cures) as compared to most other countries makes us a reliable and efficient supplier. All we know about swine nutrition, reproduction and genetics came from in-depth research efforts, most of which have roots in some university or other publicly funded project. I am certainly not taking anything away from good old on-the-farm ingenuity for which our pork producers are known. Many of the early adopters in our industry are known for taking a little developed technology and exploiting it for their personal use and gain. The entire industry eventually benefits from their resourcefulness. No, what I am asserting is that most of those ideas and most of that knowledge had some roots in a research project, which gave it scientific validity.
Now my concern lies in the attitude of so many people in high places. First, our federal and state governments have reduced funding for research to the point that we cannot and will not sustain our collective future in this business. Not moving ahead means falling behind and that is what we will be doing. The administration in Washington has stated many times that we do not need any more expenditures for research on production in animal agriculture. Many of our land grant universities switched away from production agriculture years ago because of the limitations in funding. A look at government funding of biological research shows that the lion’s share is channeled to the National Science Foundation and the National Institute of Health. This has prompted a move to more basic research and to research that has human application rather than strictly for the benefit of animal agriculture.
Even the National Pork Board with their new strategic plan has listened to a well-rounded task force of producers and others who have advised that the wise use of Pork Checkoff funds is not toward increases in research for production and health. This task force asserted that companies can do a better job than a university or government research center because they know what research needs to be done and they have the resources (financial, animal and experts) to do the work on the farm. Of course, there are fallacies with this thinking 1) companies can withhold all the results for their own benefit, 2) no failures ever get publicly released, which means we are destined to repeat them, and 3) there are no future scientists trained in the process and eventually the pipeline empties out.
This is an issue that I sincerely hope I am wrong about! However, if I am right, the tide may be so far out that it will never come back without decades of rebuilding. In the meantime, look for deterioration in our ability to compete in world markets as the low cost, reliable supplier for pork.
Editor’s Note: Dr. Meisinger is the Executive Director of the U.S. Pork Center of Excellence. To contact Dr. Meisinger, e-mail him at: drdave@iastate.edu or call him by phone at: (515) 975-3557.
This commentary is for informational purposes only. The opinions and comments expressed herein represent the opinions of the author--they do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Farms.com. This commentary is not intended to provide individual advice to anyone. Farms.com will not be liable for any errors or omissions in the information, or for any damages or losses in any way related to this commentary.