December172008.txt

_______________________________________________________________________ This service is provided by Atlantic Swine Research Partnership Inc.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, contact our Editor at newsletter@asrp.ca.
"A sailor without a destination cannot hope for a favorable wind." -- Leon Tec______________________________________________________________________ 1) Russia raises pork quota, boosts duties for poultry and pork2) U.S. pork, beef exports defy economic downturn3) Ad-Hoc Nature of Covered Products Makes Implementing COOL a Challenge4) Interactive Effects of Dietary Fat Source and Slaughter Weight.
_______________________________________________________________________ YESTERDAY'S CLOSE INFORMATION---CME HOGS---------ONTARIO pool/pplus)---------US/CDN (NOON RATE)-----Tue -----------------------------------------------------------------------PRICE AND VOLUME SUMMARY December 12 to 18 2008----------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------WEEKLY PRICE SUMMARY (last 5 weeks)----------------------------------------------------------------------- 14Nov2008 21Nov2008 28Nov2008 05Dec2008 12Dec2008 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------Ontario Pork Forward Contract Prices http://www.ontariopork.on.ca/futures/forward.html----------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------US HOGS DAILY REPORT FOR December 16 2008----------------------------------------------------------------------- Direct Trade: The direct trade prices are based on 185 lbs hog carcasswith 0.9-1.1 inch back fat and 6 inch square loin/2.0 inch depth plantdelivered.
National direct trade barrows and gilts were .11 lwr with prices ranging from 43.00-55.50, weighted average price 53.30.
Minnesota was .16 lwr at 43.00-54.39, weighted average price 52.81.
Western Cornbelt sold .47 lwr at 43.00-54.39, weighted average price52.82 and the Eastern Cornbelt was .35 hgr at 44.00-55.50 weightedaverage price 53.99.
Live Basis (240-280 lbs):National direct prices were 1.13 hgr with prices ranging from33.06-46.30, weighted average price 42.73.
Iowa-Minnesota prices were 1.29 hgr with prices ranging from36.99-44.00, weighted average price 42.98.
Western Cornbelt prices were 1.49 hgr with prices ranging 36.99-44.00,weighted average price 42.89.
Eastern Cornbelt prices were .23 hgr with prices ranging 33.06-46.30,weighted average price 42.25.
53-54% lean, 0.65"-0.80" backfat at last rib ----------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------12/16 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- HOG Slaughter under Federal InspectionTuesday _______________________________________________________________________ TODAY'S NEWS-----------------------------------------------------------------------1) Russia raises pork quota, boosts duties for poultry and pork By Janie Gabbett on 12/15/2008http://www.meatingplace.com/MembersOnly/webNews/details.aspx?item=10761 The Russian Economic Development Ministry said Friday it raised theimport quota for pork in 2009 to 531,900 metric tons from 493,500 metrictons in 2008, according to media reports.
The U.S. share of the 2009 pork import quota was increased to 100,000metric tons from 40,300 metric tons in 2008. At the same time, theministry said it will raise for one year the import duty for porkimported above the quota level to 75 percent of the contract price, from60 percent in 2008.
As previously reported, Russia has reduced its poultry import quota to952,000 metric tons from 1.212 million metric tons in 2008. The U.S.
share of that quota was decreased to 750,000 metric tons from 931,000metric tons.
Over the same period, the import duty for poultry imported above the government-set import quota is raised to 95 percent of the contractprice from 60 percent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------2) U.S. pork, beef exports defy economic downturn By Tom Johnston on 12/16/2008http://www.meatingplace.com/MembersOnly/webNews/details.aspx?item=10779 U.S. pork and beef export numbers for October improved year-on-year evenas the agriculture community feels the effects of the global economicdownturn, the U.S. Meat and Export Federation said.
Pork exports help up particularly well, posting the third-largestmonthly volume on record and representing a 46 percent volume increaseover exports from October of 2007 as well as a 55.5 percent increase invalue.
Pork and pork variety meat exports in October totaled 192,940 metrictons (425.4 million pounds) valued at $487 million, a new record formonthly export value. Export volume rose 18 percent over the previousmonth and trailed only May and June of 2008 for most pork exported in asingle month. For January through October, exports were up 67 percent to1.7 million metric tons (3.8 billion pounds), with value exceeding $4.1billion.
U.S. beef exports also remain positive. Although declining from thesummer peak, beef and beef variety meat exports exceeded October 2007volume levels by 16 percent. Beef exports including variety meats forthe month reached 89,205 metric tons (196.7 million pounds) valued at$348.3 million, exceeding year-ago export value totals by 31.4 percent.
January through October beef exports increased 31 percent to 840,121metric tons (1.8 billion pounds), with value surpassing $3.1 billion, anincrease of 43 percent.
USMEF economist Erin Daley, said global economic conditions surelylimited the growth of pork and beef exports.
"However, we are continuing to see the value and quality of U.S. exportsreflected in the export numbers," she said. "Even with the depreciationin the value of many countries' currencies, we're still seeing strongperformance by our beef and pork products, defying many expectations.
"USMEF does understand that some countries are having difficultydistributing imported meat due to dampened consumer demand," she wenton. "This is especially critical in areas like China, with large stocksof frozen pork, and Korea with large volumes of beef in storage. Priceswere much higher, even for meat imported just a few months ago, makingit difficult to sell under current market conditions." -----------------------------------------------------------------------3) Ad-Hoc Nature of Covered Products Makes Implementing COOL a Challenge Farmscape for December 16, 2008 (Episode 3044)www.farmscape.ca The U.S. based Food Marketing Institute reports part of the difficultyin adapting to U.S. Mandatory Country of Labeling is that many productsare covered by the new rules while many similar products are not. U.S.
Mandatory Country of Origin Labelling came into effect September 30 andthe U.S. Department of Agriculture is expected to begin enforcement inApril. The Food Marketing Institute represents about 15 hundred foodretailers and wholesalers in the U.S. and around the world. FMI chieflegal officer Deborah White says part of the challenge facing retailersin implementing the new rules is that there isn't a lot of rhyme orreason for what is covered and what isn't.
Clip-Deborah White-Food Marketing InstituteOur congress here in the United States decided that the foods that should be covered by Country of origin Labelling are beef, pork, lamb,chicken, fresh and frozen produce, seafood and then sort of anassortment of nuts and miscellaneous items, that is peanuts pecansmacadamia nuts and ginseng. In terms of whether or not any of thesethings should be covered or shouldn't be covered, the Food MarketingInstitutes has long opposed mandatory Country of origin Labelling. Wefeel that information on products can best be delivered to consumersthrough voluntary marketing type programs. We don't believe that any ofthese products should be the subject of mandatory Country of originLabelling but part of the challenge that our members have inimplementing this is it is a sort of an ad-hoc list without a whole lotof rhyme and reason. For example chicken is covered but turkey isn't orpeanuts and pecans are covered but walnuts and almonds aren't so thatpresents some challenges in and of itself.
White notes the new labeling rules apply only to covered commoditiesthat are sold by U.S. retailers but they do not apply to products soldin restaurants, products destined for export out of the U.S. or toproducts that fall with the USDA's definition of processed commodities.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------4) Interactive Effects of Dietary Fat Source and Slaughter Weight inGrowing-Finishing Swine: I. Growth Performance and Longissimus MuscleFatty Acid Composition Apple JK, Maxwell CV, Galloway DL, Hutchison S, Hamilton CR. Departmentof Animal Science, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, 72701. J AnimSci. 2008 Dec 9. [Epub ahead of print] Crossbred pigs (n = 288) were used to test the interactive effects ofdietary fat source and slaughter weight on live performance, carcasstraits, and fatty acid composition of the LM. Pigs were blocked byinitial BW, and, within each of 9 blocks, pens (8 pigs/pen) wererandomly assigned to either control corn-soybean meal grower andfinisher diets devoid of added fat(Ctrl) or diets formulated with 5%beef tallow (BT), poultry fat (PF), or soybean oil (SBO). Immediatelyafter treatment allotment, as well as at mean block weights of 45.5,68.1, 90.9, and 113.6 kg, 1 pig was randomly selected from each pen,slaughtered, and allowed to chill for 48 h at 1 degrees C. Backfat wasmeasured on right sides, and a sample of the LM was removed for fattyacid composition analysis. Regardless of source, inclusion of fat inswine diets did not (P >/= 0.349) affect ADG, ADFI, or G:F. Furthermore,carcasses from pigs fed diets formulated with 5% fat had greater (P =0.013) average backfat depths than those from pigs fed the Ctrl diet.
Live weight, carcass weight, and backfat depths increased (P < 0.001) asslaughter weight increased from 28.1 to 113.6 kg. The proportion of SFAin the LM increased (P < 0.001) with increasing slaughter weight from28.1 to 68.1 kg, but SFA percentages were similar between 68.1 and 113.6kg, and pigs fed the Ctrl diet had greater (P = 0.032) proportions ofSFA than pigs fed SBO and PF. Moreover, the proportion of all MUFAincreased (P < 0.001) 9.4 percentage units from 28.1 to 113.6 kg;however, only pigs fed SBO had lower (P = 0.004) MUFA percentages thanthose fed Ctrl, BT, and PF. Even though the proportion of PUFA in the LMdecreased with increasing slaughter weight, pigs fed SBO had greaterPUFA percentages, a higher PUFA-to-SFA ratio, and greater iodine valuesthan all other dietary treatments when slaughtered at weights of 45.5 kgor greater (fat source x slaughter weight, P < 0.001). Results of thisstudy indicate that fat source had little to no impact on live pigperformance, but feeding a polyunsaturated fat source altered the fattyacid profile of the LM within the first 23 kg of gain, and, morespecifically, including 5% SBO in swine diets could lead to economicalramifications associated with soft pork/fat.
_______________________________________________________________________

Source: http://www.aphin.upei.ca/asrp/December172008.pdf