We are red, we are white, we are Danish dynamite!” – Reader of the agricultural special press, you might be subject to such kind of fallacy if you bought into the interpretation given by the “Duesser Mastferkelwarentest 2008” (testing carried out on fattening piglets; note on the part of translator).

But there is no rose without a thorn! For if taking a closer look at the ISN analysis of the testing you will find it backed in a detailed way: It’s a poor comparison, and even the conclusions derived from it are.

So, in many a point the evaluation doesn’t reach far enough to allow reliable and statistically firm information to be given. That is an unfortunate fact, because the North Rhine-Westphalia Chamber of Agriculture is particularly known for its neutrality and objectiveness.

German breeding companies, such as BHZP, Huelsenberger and PIC (just to mention a few), which have done a great job over the past two years truly do no longer take second place to the Danes or the Dutch. This is very clearly supported by the figures accomplished at my own farm. It’s a slap in the face which none of the local pig breeders has deserved to be given.

Comparisons are important, verily, and market transparency is one of the ISN’s ultimate ambitions. However, comparing apples to oranges is not a sensible thing to do. You rather need to compare like with like. In this context, comparing the new Danish sow with the “ancient antecessor sow” (so-to-speak out-of-date German breeding) must be regarded as a crass failure of the method.

The testing personnel at Duesse seriously needs to acquiesce to being asked whether or not taking samples from eight farms raising pigs of Danish genetic origin only holds the same significance as does taking ten times as many samples at least of and including other origin.

All the more, having the Danish descent being evaluated only for gilts up to the fourth litter then does not really contribute to make the conclusions drawn from the evaluation sound believable!

Over-evaluating live-born piglets, thus supporting the Danish descent, is being relativised by hindsight if a closer look is taken into the quantities of those piglets really weaned. Unfortunately, the fact goes under that the Danish are ranking far ahead related to the number of piglets lost in the process.

We as PIC multiplying breeders hold 550 sows at our farm. Per sow and year we achieve as many as 29 weaners. The annual mean amounts to 12.8 live-born and 11.8 weaned piglets per litter. Certainly, this may be attributed to the farm management, too, but it also shows how highly productive the sows of local descent are!

Furthermore, we observe a lack of sow-planner-data evaluation; the data have not been cleaned up. Yet, every practising expert knows about how significantly the data collected relating to losses vary between the individual farms for computing reasons.

All this looks like being an unneeded “butcher’s party” held for the German multiplying breeders. Standard fundamentals and conditions would definitely have been required to be formulated before testing. This, however, was omitted. All the more, the thought hurts that handling the results in a more responsible way would have been beneficial to the whole matter.

Local descent definitely can keep up with that of our neighbouring countries. In practice, the differences are no more than just marginal. They become blurred anyway between the origins tested if you focus on the right boar to be used for achieving the final product!