Benchmarking Value in Pork

1
Benchmarking Value in Pork

• Research conducted by
• Univ of Ill and CSU
• National Pork Producers Council
• Published
• Summer 2003

2
Overview

• National Beef Quality Audits
• National Pork Chain Quality Audit
• 1992
• Producers, Packers and Processors
• Freshness and Wholesomeness
• Benchmarking Pork Value
• Producers, Packers and Processors
• Consumers

3
Overview

• 1992
• Excessive fat
• Poor muscle color / water-holding capacity
• Inconsistent live weights
• Too many abscesses
• Excessive bruising

4
2002 Benchmark

• Consisted of seven sections
• Demographics
• Procurement
• Carcass condemnation issues
• Weight distributions
• Carcass composition
• Meat quality
• Marketing

5
2002 Benchmark

• 64 of kill represented
• 98 million annually 62.7 million
• Slaughtered in 2002
• Concerns based on Dollar Value
• Inconsistent weights
• Thin bellies
• PSE
• Too Fat
• Abscesses / injection sites

6
2002 Benchmark

• 64 of kill represented
• 98 million annually 62.7 million
• Concerns based on Dollar Value
• Inconsistent weights
• Thin bellies
• PSE Est 8.08 loss/hd
• Too Fat
• Abscesses / injection sites

7
Carcass Traits

• Trait 1992 2002
• Live weight 245 256
• Backfat 1.1 .70
• Muscle, 49.0 55.5
• Ham wt 21.8 26.0
• Loin wt 17.2 20.9
• Boston butt wt
• Belly wt

8
Carcass Traits

• Trait 1992 2002
• Live weight 245 256
• Backfat 1.1 .70
• Muscle, 49.0 55.5
• Ham wt 21.8 26.0
• Loin wt 17.2 20.9
• Boston butt wt 6.2 6.0
• Belly wt 14.8 15.0

9
Carcass Traits

• Trait 1992 2002 change
• Live weight 245 256 4.3
• Backfat 1.1 .70 36.4
• Muscle, 49.0 55.5 11.7
• Ham wt 21.8 26.0 16.0
• Loin wt 17.2 20.9 17.7
• Boston butt wt 6.2 6.0 3.2
• Belly wt 14.8 15.0 1.5

10
Live Weight Ranges

• Indv. Packer
• Weight, lbs Avg Max Count
• lt200 1.1 5.0
• 200-240 14.1 50.0
• 241-270 44.6 61.0
• 271-300 34.3 43.0
• gt300 5.9 11.0

11
Transportation

• Indv. Packer
• Miles Max distance
• lt100 51.8 93.0
• 101-200 32.6 66.0
• gt200 15.6 30.0

12
Time in Lairage

• Indv. Packer
• Time, hrs Avg Max Count
• lt1 1.9 10.0
• 1 - 3 38.4 90.0
• 3 - 5 43.0 75.0
• 5 - 8 7.0 20.0
• gt8 9.7 56.0

13
Time in Lairage

• Indv. Packer
• Time, hrs Avg Max Count
• lt1 1.9 10.0
• 1 - 3 38.4 90.0
• 3 - 5 43.0 75.0
• 5 - 8 7.0 20.0
• gt8 9.7 56.0

14
Time in Lairage

• Indv. Packer
• Time, hrs Avg Max Count
• lt1 1.9 10.0
• 1 - 3 38.4 90.0
• 3 - 5 43.0 75.0
• 5 - 8 7.0 20.0
• gt8 9.7 56.0

15
Backfat Ranges

• Indv. Packer
• Depth, in Avg Max Count
• lt.60 12.3 15.0
• .61 - .80 55.3 53.0
• .81 - 1.00 28.1 29.0
• 1.01 - 1.2 3.5 42.0
• 1.21 - 1.4 .7 42.0
• 1.41 - 1.6 .1 25.0
• 1.61 - 1.8 0.0
• gt1.8 0.0

16
Backfat Ranges

• Indv. Packer
• Depth, in Avg Max Count
• lt.60 12.3 15.0
• .61 - .80 55.3 95.7 53.0
• .81 - 1.00 28.1 29.0
• 1.01 - 1.2 3.5 42.0
• 1.21 - 1.4 .7 42.0
• 1.41 - 1.6 .1 25.0
• 1.61 - 1.8 0.0
• gt1.8 0.0

17
Muscle Ranges

• Indv. Packer
• Depth, in Avg Max Count
• lt 45 .7 3.0
• 45 47.9 2.0 6.0
• 48 50.9 8.1 20.0
• 51 53.9 25.9 79.0
• 54 56.9 63.0 88.0
• gt 57 .3 1.0

18
Condemnations

• Issue Avg
• Diseased 52.0
• Abscesses 9.3
• Brusing 6.5
• Arthritis 7.5
• Skin problems 5.1
• Broken bones 3.7
• Injection Sites 1.9
• Residues .1
• Others 13.9

19
Color/Firmness/Structure

• Avg 1992
• Pale, Soft, Watery 15.5 10.2 5.3
• Normal and firm 82.6
• Dark, Firm, Dry 1.9
• Increase of 3.3 million hogs with PSE
• 9.7 with it.

20
2002 Benchmark

• 8.08 lost per hd
• Inconsistent weights 1.32
• Thin bellies 1.00
• PSE .90
• Too Fat .85
• Abscesses / injection sites .57

21
2002 Benchmark

• 8.08 lost per hd
• Inconsistent weights 1.32
• Product packaging
• Further processing wt relative to curing
• Consumer expectations

22
2002 Benchmark

• 8.08 lost per hd
• Inconsistent weights 1.32
• Thin bellies 1.00
• Processing losses
• Poor quality and smaller sized slices

23
2002 Benchmark

• 8.08 lost per hd
• Inconsistent weights 1.32
• Thin bellies 1.00
• PSE .90
• Financial losses all through the chain
• - purge loss
• - decreased protein functionality

24
2002 Benchmark

• 8.08 lost per hd
• Inconsistent weights 1.32
• Thin bellies 1.00
• PSE .90
• Too Fat .85
• Even though market hog is leaner
• 1992 loss 1st at over 2.50 /d
• Excessive seam fat in the shoulder and ham
  

25
2002 Benchmark

• 8.08 lost per hd
• Inconsistent weights 1.32
• Thin bellies 1.00
• PSE .90
• Too Fat .85
• Abscesses / injection sites .57
• Attributed to trim losses

26
Carcass Loss

• 9.88
• 1.80
• 8.08
• Much of the change due to a decrease in fatness
  but increases in meat quality issues have arisen

27
Alternative Marketing

• Cooperatives
• Freezer Pork
• Internet Marketing

28
Specialty Programs

• Berkshire Gold
• Founded in 1984
• Export Market
• Excel in Pork Quality
• Processing
• IBP, Independent Meats in PA
• 94 7,800
• 95 49,000
• 96 78,000
• 97 218,000
• 98 147,000
• 99 55,000 Changed to 100 Berkshire
• 00 50,000
• 01 40,000
• 02 15-20,000 Changed to 100 Berkshire with
  Registration Papers
• 03 5,000 Lost contract with Japanese

29
Specialty Programs

• Certified Chester White Pork
• Founded in 2001
• Upscale Restaurants
• Excel in Pork Quality
• Processing
• Private meat company in Chicago
• Sells to upscale restaurants
• Premiums up to 10 per cwt
• Will take ½ bloods
• Chester White Assoc.

30
Cooperatives

• Prairie Farms Cooperative
• Founded in 1999
• Membership 13,000 40-50 members
• Processing
• Dawson, MN
• Was processing 100 hd per day
• Initially Organic Hormone Free

31
Cooperatives

• Minnesota Certified Pork
• Five producers started in 1999
• Standardized Best Management Practices
• Slaughter at Swift in Worthingtion
• 2001 sold at Kowalskis, cities
• Quit in Jan 2003
• Couldnt go case ready
• Didnt have enough dollars for advirtisement

32
Cooperatives

• Minnesota Certified Pork
• What was learned
• 1,000 dollars and man hours promoting in store
• No customer loyalty was gained
• Concept still sound
• Food Safety
• Animal Welfare
• Environmental management

33
Cooperatives

• Pork America
• Founded in 1999
• Membership
• 500 and .10 per hog
• Processing
• Plant Estherville, IA
• Prior to close slaughtering 100 /day
• Employed 12 people

Le Ann Tyson North Liberty, IA 319-665-3107
34
Meadowbrook Farms

• 1999 Amer. Heritage Farms, Inc explore farmer
  owned plant
• 1999 Amer. Family Farms Co-op formed in Northern
  IL
• 2000 Meadowbrook Farms Premium Foods, Inc
• Farmer owned Co-op to own marketing division
• 2000 Amer. Premium Foods forms Co-op in Southern
  IL
• 2002 All four are merged to for a 100 farmer
  owned company Belleville, IL
• 200 family farms own and control all aspects of
  production, slaughter, processing and sales.

35
Meadowbrook Farms

• Unique Pricing Structure
• Based on Primal weights and offal value
• Primals
• Hams
• Picnic Shoulder
• Boston Butt
• Loins
• Bellies
• Offal
• Liver, Feet, Neck Bones, Heart, Tongue, Snout,
  Ear, Tail, Stomach,
• Kidney, Jowl, Head meat, Trim, Spare Ribs

36
Niche Marketing

• Satisfy the needs and wants of the consumer
• By definition your market could shrink away
• Approach
• Give samples
• Education
• Turn customers into salesmen
• How much do you need for a niche?
• 300 million people
• 1/3 of percent is a million
• Sell a 10 product to 10 of these you have a
  million in sales

37
Niche Marketing

• Niman Ranch
• 20 year old west coast company
• Sells products to people concerned about
  environment ect
• 1999 Iowa and Minnesota farmers
• Pasture farrow no confinement
• No antibiotics All Natural

38
Niche Marketing

• Natural / Organic
• Bigger Market of White Collar Workers
• U of M researchers reported
• Small producer friendly
• Lower capital requirements
• Numerous marketing channels
• Disadvantage is continuous supply

39
Organic Standards

• Prohibited
• Antibiotics
• Growth hormones
• Pesticides, chemical fertilizer, sewage sludge
• Irradiation
• Genetic modification
• Livestock must be given access to the outdoors
• Free roaming
• Organically grown feed used
• Land must be free of chemical applications for
  three years before corps can be considered
  organic

40
Niche Marketing

• Ethnic Groups
• - Larger and Larger portion of population
• Gorditos Meats Meat supplier to 10 Hispanic
  markets in Utah
• - wanted whole carcasses in three sizes
• 30-60 lb, 70-90 lb, 100-160 lb

41
Direct Sales Marketing

• Live Freezer Sales
• - Sell live, use local processing facility to
  cut for customers
• - Lorenz Meats in Cannon Falls, MN
• - Sell at 20-30 cents/lb greater than market
• Home Delivery
• - Goosemobile, Neuberger family, Canistota SD
• - started with geese for holidays now 4-6 trucks
• Farmers Markets
• - Dakota Lean Bruner family 30 sales in Sioux
  Falls
• Internet Marketing
• - Omaha Steaks greatest success story
• Catering

42
Marketing

• System for assuring Pork Quality
• Advertise to consumers
• Farmland Process Verified
• Goal Improve food safety, quality and
  traceability
• Key elements to the verification process
• Specified Genetics
• Nutritional program
• Quality controlled feed
• FDA approved health care
• Humane animal handling
• On farm environmental review
• Pork quality assurance Level III certified

43
Quality Control Points

• Genetics
• - Choice of breeds 9 years of NBS data
• - Meat Quality Berkshires excell
• - Durocs excel in both meat quality and
  production traits
• - Greater intramuscular fat
• - Sires within breed EPDs important
• - Halothane Gene (Stress)
• - All registerable hogs must be Stress Gene
  free
• - Napole Gene
• - Predominant in Hampshires, work hard to remove

44
Quality Control Points

• 2) Proper Vitamin and mineral supplementation
• - Vitamin E
• - Magnesium
• - Amino Acids
• - Moderate use of unsaturated fats
• - Feed with-drawl 12 16 hours before
  sticking

45
Quality Control Points

• On farm hog handling
• - Stress/Health management
• - Loading leave hogs out of pen twice before
  loading
• - eliminate use of electric prods
• - Slaughter at heaviest weights possible insure
  marbling
• - Design quality facilities
• - Handlers required to watch NPPC
• Handling of Hogs on the Farm
• Auditing by outside firms

Future
46
Quality Control Points

• 4) Transportation
• - Producer responsibility to make sure that
  livestock
• haulers have seen the NPPC Handling
  for Transporters
• video.
• - Use flat floor trailers instead of semis
  pulling Pot Bellies
• - Load size minimum 4.2 sp feet per 250 lbs
  hog
• - Weather when hauling
• - Hot provide cooling

47
Quality Control Points

• 5) Preslaughter Handling
• At plant free access two water
• Rest hogs 2-3 hours be fore unloading
• Design facilities that adhere to proper handling
  techniques outlined by Dr. Temple Grandin
• Pre Stunning Rough handling of pigs in the
  stunning chute during the last few minutes before
  exsanguination will increase PSE
• - stresses immediately before slaughter have a
  greater affect the stresses earlier on
• - use V belt restrainers/movers

48
Quality Control Points

• 6) The Stunning System
• Electrical
• Broken backs, shoulders, blood splash,
  bruising, and greater concern with worker saftey
• CO2
• Pigs are gassed in chamber (individually or
  mass) with CO2
• Stun to Stick Interval 10 sec after stunning
  avg 30 s

49
Quality Control Points

• 7) Pre Chilling
• Evisceration
• - Stick to chill should be no longer than 30 min
• Most plants 20-25
• - Splitting needs to be done not to damage loin
• - Fecal contamination
• Adhere to 5-6 hours with out feed
• - On line measurements of meat Quality
• - industry experts not confident
• - pH on line many errors
• - only when used in groups (ie trts for
  research)

50
Quality Control Points

• 8) Carcass chilling time
• - Internal muscle temperature 36o 40o 24hrs
  post
• slaughter
• 9) Fabrication
• - Vacuum packaging will dramatically extend
  shelf life
• - Enhancement sodium phosphate and water in to
  muscle
• - protects meat from consumers over
  cooking
• 10) Case Ready Products
• - To remain competitive with other meats more
  case ready
• products need to be developed

51
(No Transcript)
52
Future Traceability

• Why?
• 1) Bioterrorism
• 2) Food Safety
• - export customers demand more information
• 3) Producer groups trying to capitalize on
  profits

53
Future Traceability

• Three main issues need to be integrated before
  individual animal ID will be successful
• 1) Producer have to gather information on the
  farm level
• 2) Packing industry has to report back
• - assign value
• - report quality concerns
• 3) Deliver information to producer and have
  available for retailers or meat purchasers who
  desire information

54
Future Traceability

• What traceability is claimed to offer
• On farm assessment of profitability on a per hd
  basis
• Paperless record keeping with real-time reporting
• Carcass evaluation could be linked to lifetime
  events
• Used to validate husbandry and management
  practices
• Be able to sort for markets with better
  individual knowledge