'We are stopping, but pigs belong to the Netherlands'

When Martin Houben, director of the Houbensteyn Group, announced last week that his company would stop keeping pigs, it caused a wave of indignation both inside and outside the sector. The company, which is a leader in the use of residual flows, believes that the business climate for pig farmers in our country has deteriorated to such an extent that stopping keeping pigs is seen as a better option than continuing. It does not mean that there is no perspective for those who remain. "Houbensteyn may stop that, but pigs are part of the Netherlands."

The fact that one of the Netherlands' largest pig farms will soon cease to exist has caused quite a stir in the pig sector. The company was way ahead of its time when it was able to produce a company-specific report in 2009 in which it mapped out its own CO2 footprint per kilogram of pork compared to the sector average. Now that it seems only a matter of time before these 'new' key figures can lead to added value, the company is stopping pig farming. What was the deciding factor and what are the prospects for those who remain in the sector? In conversation with Houben, he is sober and realistic: "We must not get caught up in a polarised debate, we are entrepreneurs and we will continue."

The decision to stop keeping pigs must have been an extremely difficult one for you. What ultimately made the difference?
"It was a rational decision and made as an entrepreneur. First of all, our hearts are crying. It is very difficult to make this choice. The LBV regulations are presented as wildly attractive, but I dare say that it is not wildly attractive for anyone to break off their life's work. When we determined our nitrogen deposition in 2023 with the Aerius check provided by the government, it turned out that all our locations were peak polluters. We were quite shocked by this. What implications does this have for the future and how does it affect our development perspective? We can continue to worry, but after much deliberation we have decided to register our locations. Above all, we are also entrepreneurs. We will continue with the Houbensteyn Group, only on different paths. The compensation for the buildings and rights is in order. We are exchanging the bricks for liquidity and making new plans."

Jullie announcement has given the sector quite a fright. What does it say for Dutch pig farming if a pioneer like Houbensteyn sees no prospects?
"We understand that it has made colleagues and people in the sector think. The decision for us to stop is not a yardstick for the perspective of the sector. It is a choice for us individually. We are truly convinced that there is a good perspective for those who stay and who know how to respond to social developments in the right way. We have to face the fact that there is a social and political desire for a smaller sector. We can have many opinions and discussions about that, but we can also accept it and anticipate it. That is also our position. No polarising debate, but looking at what is happening around us and responding to it. For those who stay, there is a very good perspective in a smaller sector. Houbensteyn is stopping, but pigs are part of the Netherlands."

What exactly does that perspective look like?
"We can't say it often enough: the pig is the ultimate circular animal. Millions of tons of residual flows are converted into high-quality protein by pigs. We therefore believe that pigs belong in areas where people also live. This is where the food industry is present, from which these residual flows originate, and is also concentrated. People, the food industry and pigs are therefore actually seeking each other out. Converting these flows into high-quality protein in an efficient manner will give our sector a future. It leads to added value compared to the competition in terms of the CO2 footprint per kilogram of meat and can also bring a plus in feed costs."

The announcement also stated that you could not participate in the 1-star Better Life quality mark (BLK) due to the size of the locations. Should the criteria be revised?
"This is double. Personally I say: yes, a certain company size does not necessarily say anything about the level of animal welfare. But; the BLK quality mark also wants to take into account socially relevant criteria. Large companies are simply less liked by consumers. In recent years we have worked hard to revise the criteria for company sizes, but without success. This works to our disadvantage now that we cannot realize this plus. We fully support the way of keeping pigs, as we have done. I myself am only one small opinion in our society, many people think differently about this."

Has community money been well spent under the LBV schemes?
"If you look at the ultimate goal of the regulations, I think they are efficiently set up. The regulations are clear and simple, which prevents discussions and lawsuits and thus saves costs for the taxpayer. In this way, action can also be taken relatively quickly and the ministry has organised this well in that sense."

Future-oriented, beautiful companies like yours are disappearing now. Is it desirable that older stables with high emissions and less animal comfort are retained?
"The feeling you describe is logical, but it is not something that is reflected in the objectives of the regulations. We see the focus on peak polluters and that says enough. These companies have to leave the field. These are often larger developed locations. Seen like that, we are going back to basics: a smaller livestock population. In my opinion, that objective is served by the regulation, regardless of whether you agree with the principles and the legal basis of, for example, the peak load criterion (2.500 mol deposition on Natura 2000 areas within a radius of 25 km)."

You come across as very calm and rational considering everything that is going on, is that your secret in entrepreneurship?
"That may seem so, but as I said, the decision is very close to our hearts. What I do want to convey is that we as a sector (but also as a company and personally) have to move on. In that respect, I always try to look at things rationally and soberly. It is clear that our politics and society want a smaller sector. People also prefer not to see large companies or so-called 'mega stables'. We have no use for a polarised debate and should not get dragged into it, we are entrepreneurs and will continue. Of course, we have to make our voices heard, as we have certainly done in light of the BLK criteria, for example. This also applies to communicating our vision: showing the public how we are doing. That does not alter the fact that we sometimes have to accept that developments do not always match our own ideas and visions. In entrepreneurship, I simply try to respond to this. Houbensteyn Groep will simply continue. See it as a reorganisation. There are plenty of new opportunities that we want to respond to in the future. That is what we do in a down-to-earth way, looking around us and adapting the company accordingly."

© DCA Market Intelligence. This market information is subject to copyright. It is not permitted to reproduce, distribute, disseminate or make the content available to third parties for compensation, in any form, without the express written permission of DCA Market Intelligence.