As more swine operations adopt automated monitoring and computer vision, industry experts say facilities must now cater to three very different occupants under the same roof: the pig, the camera and the caretaker.
While proper illumination helps cameras capture reliable data, Courtney Archer, assistant professor in the Department of Animal Sciences at the University of Illinois, warns producers not to overlook the people walking the pens.
“We cannot design lighting exclusively around the pig and forget that people have to work in that environment, too,” Archer says. “Ideally, we design systems that work for all three.”
Here are three reasons to take a second look at your barn lighting:
1. Workplace quality directly affects worker well-being.
Moving pigs, operating machinery, and completing routine chores safely require clear visibility. Beyond basic safety, caretakers deserve an environment that doesn’t cause physical strain.
“Bright spots, deep shadows, and flickering lamps make the work tiring,” explains Erica Bongers, animal lighting application specialist with Signify Animal Lighting. “A fluorescent tube that flickers should be replaced, not accepted.”
2. Lighting enables precision stockmanship.
Catching health issues early requires catching subtle cues.
“Caretakers are looking for fairly subtle indicators: lameness, injuries, posture changes, pigs that are slow to rise, abnormal lying behavior, feed or water problems, skin changes, and differences in social behavior,” Archer points out. “If the barn is too dark, we make good stockmanship more difficult.”
While computer vision can scan pens around the clock, Bongers notes that technology only points the way: “Computer vision does not replace the person in the barn, and it should not try. It tells you where to look. The person still walks to the pen and decides. What it adds is proof.”
But without proper light, that final, critical human decision becomes a guessing game.
3. Technology must adapt to the pig—not the other way around.
Innovation should improve animal welfare, not compromise it. Archer cautions producers against distorting natural biological cycles to satisfy hardware limitations.
“If a computer vision system requires bright lights to remain on all night to collect useful data, I would argue that we need to improve the technology rather than alter the animal’s biological environment to accommodate the camera,” Archer says. “That is where infrared cameras and other imaging technologies can become very useful. They potentially allow us to continue observing animals during their dark period without disrupting the light-dark cycle we are trying to provide.”
Barn lighting cannot be designed in a vacuum. True efficiency occurs only when technology supports, rather than disrupts, the animals and the people who care for them.
