Livestock and meat situation

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Livestock and meat situation
Physical Description:
v. : ; 27 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
United States -- Dept. of Agriculture. -- Economics and Statistics Service
United States -- Dept. of Agriculture. -- Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives Service
United States -- Bureau of Agricultural Economics
United States -- Agricultural Marketing Service
United States -- Dept. of Agriculture. -- Economic Research Service
United States -- World Food and Agricultural Outlook and Situation Board
Publisher:
Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Place of Publication:
Washington, D.C
Publication Date:
Frequency:
bimonthly (irregular)
bimonthly
completely irregular

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Animal industry -- Periodicals -- United States   ( lcsh )
Meat industry and trade -- Periodicals -- United States   ( lcsh )
Genre:
serial   ( sobekcm )
federal government publication   ( marcgt )
statistics   ( marcgt )
periodical   ( marcgt )

Notes

Statement of Responsibility:
Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Dates or Sequential Designation:
LMS-1 (Jan. 1947)-LMS-238 (Nov. 1980).
Issuing Body:
Issued 1947-Nov. 1953 by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics; Dec. 1953-Mar. 1961, by the Agricultural Marketing Service; May 1961-<Aug. 1976> by the Dept. of Agriculture, Economic Research Service; <Sept. 1976>-Aug. 1980 by the Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives Service; Oct.-Nov. 1980 by the Economics and Statistics Service.
Issuing Body:
"Approved by the World Food and Agriculture Outlook and Situation Board."
General Note:
Issues prior to Jan. 1978 were classed: A 93.15: or A 88.16/8: or A 36.158:.
General Note:
Title from caption.
General Note:
Some issues accompanied by supplement.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 000482168
notis - ACP9807
oclc - 01756046
lccn - 59030695
issn - 0024-516X
Classification:
lcc - HD9414 .A25
ddc - 338.1/7/600973
System ID:
AA00008526:00002

Related Items

Preceded by:
Livestock and wool situation
Succeeded by:
Livestock and meat outlook & situation


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

T .. | FOR RELEASE
THE FE B. 9f P. M.M]


VU Vq./ DwT UAT1 N
SIT UATION


BUREAU OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
SJAN


UARY 1951


MEATS and MEAT PRODUCTS
U. S. Average Values and Marketing Charges


1920 1930 1940


AV. OF 335.4 LBS. MEAT PRODUCTS (MARKET BASKET)
o AAA HOG PROCESSING TAXES #SUBSIDY PAYMENTS
U.tS. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NEG.46676-X
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NEG.46676-X:


GROSS LESS BYPRODUCT ALLOWANCE


X BUREAU OF'AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS


Average retail prices for meats advanced
sharply in the spring and summer of 1950 and
averaged higher for the year than in 1949. The
marketing charge for meats, which is usually
more nearly stable than pricesof meats or meat
animals, apparently did not change much in


1950 from its general postwar level.
The marketing charge for meats includes
the entire spread from value of the live animal
to price in the retail market, and covers mar-
keting, processing and distribution costs for
both live animals and meats.


LMS-47


4 PER LB.


40


20


0

20


0


1950









-2-


(n
0
z
4 0 0
0 N -
X
1-


U_ M Cl t

2 I-

< f a ^
Lin


1- z'Iio



m0 0
w M' 0 0

OOX
a: ;
a r Q


I --



( -- -4-
Uu



-J z O
_ j 5 1W "

> .J S ;
-0 K
-- Q 1 \^


W o ntf wa
0o S? a 02
a0 r z 0 0 0 0 Z 0
3 Tr en -
C L. aW 0



I _
1-^--~ ---- -- ---- I1-- -1- U) e- |-I--*

SI 0-


J z I. >' L )
0
r t .- .- -!* -< -


< 1 N m 1 -
-- -Ch m --






iw -
a.;S ^ 0,_J |-










I- ISOz o
3u E n5 Z 0 ( n 0 o



D X C ir 3 0

u z oC oz 0i








~..
2i 2
-' -- ,1 <, <
1 0. CL a-U











2'. o z "
- o-- ( -- I -i









S c i
9LD
T 1 I z I I 11 I-

e- F- -i-
0- % 00


C| "rc -- \ \ ?. L I--
< ~ ~ ~ P LA\ I J < 5 1

cl ) M> )

8~tl 0P Lio ^ ^S
Clg ci' S
0


T I


*U







os-
u
00






LL


0
o 0
0o 0






* I 0 .

*1- 8
^---


S- 5.






I II

0.)


u
0

o 0 o2



o o
\ -T -












CL
5















I.
Ln inz
-
0 002















dp
z





co
I0 a



I- -ya--X



K


0
- co in CM
IE


1D 1w Nl 0


-i
IL
dc-







THE LIVESTOCK AND MEAT SITUATION
m e ae me Wa W e a -e a -me W a

Approved by the Outlook and Situation Board, January 25, 1951

USUARY

On January 26 the Economic Stabilization Agency issued a general price
and wage freeze which placed ceilings on wholesale and retail prices of meats.
Ceilings on meat are the highest prices of the period from December 19 to
January 25. Prices of live animals wede not put under control.

Price trends up to the time of the order had been generally upward, as
demand had increased further and slaughter supplies of livestock had been re-
duced seasonally*

Prices of hogs advanced considerably from mid-December to late January.
Hog slaughter decreased in January from its early December peak but was above
January last year. Slaughter will not increase until about the middle of
March, when sizable marketing will begin from the 1950 fall pig crop.

Prices of cattle also rose in late 1950 and in January. The biggest
increase from mid-fall was in the top grades. Slaughter of cattle in January
was seasonally smaller than in December but slightly larger than last January.
In both December and January, beef production was moderately larger than a
year earlier. Greater numbers of well-finished cattle in market receipts
lifted average slaughter weights substantially, Numbers of well-finished
cattle marketed and total production of beef are likely to remain a little
larger than last year.

Prices of lambs set new highs in January* Sheep and lamb slaughter,
which at this season is made up largely of fed lambs, was somewhat smaller
than in January last year. Slaughter will decline seasonally and will likely
remain below a year earlier The number of lambs on feed January 1 was down
6 percent from January 1949. The reduction was due to the smaller 1950 lamb
crop and the increased proportion of ewe lambs retained last fall for addi-
tion to breeding herds, Except for the additional ewe lambs held back, lamb
slaughter late in 1950 was fairly large relative to the size of the lamb crop.

Reports on numbers of cattle on feed and of hogs to be raised point to
a moderate increase in meat production for 1951 compared with 1950. On
January 1 a record number of cattle were on feed -- 5 percent more than last
year, There were 2 percent more on feed in the Corn Belt this year than last
and 15 percent more in the western States. However, the numbers on feed
January 1 included an unusually large proportion of cattle of light weight,
which will not reach market until late in the year. Prospects are that total
beef production for the year will be moderately larger than last year.

Farmers saved 9 percent more pigs last fall than the previous fall and
they have planned for 6 percent more pigs this spring than last. The increase
in fall pigs will result in a roughly equivalent increase in pork production
during the season from March through August, eand the increase that is realiz-
ed in spring pigs will govern pork production beginning in September. Slaugh-
ter weights of hogs are expected to average slightly heavier in 1951 than last
year,.thus contributing to the increase in total pork production.

Pork and beef supplies may be up enough in 1951 to fill military needs
and provide 3 pounds more meat per person than the 145 pounds in 1950o


LMS-47


- 3 -


n than the 145 pounds in 1950.


LMS-47


- 3 -




JANUARY 1951


VIEm AND OUTLOOK

January Meat Production
Down Seasonallyj Still
Above Last Year

Total meat production in January was seasonally below December, but
above January of last year. Production declined sharply at the holiday
season, as it usually does, then recovered. January production of beef
and pork was larger than last year, but production of veal and of lamb and
mutton was smaller.

Hog Slaughter Down
Seasonally; Further
Decreases Likely

*Hog slaughter and pork production decreased in January from the
seasonal peak late last year but was still fairly large for the month.
According to preliminary estimates, Federally inspected slaughter of hogs
for the week ending January 20 totaled 1,584 thousand head, 177 thousand
below the peak six weeks earlier. The number of hogs slaughtered under
inspection the first three weeks in January was about 5 1/2 percent larger
than a year earlier.

Hog slaughter will probably continue to decline until sometime in
March, when marketing of hogs from the 1950 fall pig crop will begin in
volume.

The total number of hogs slaughtered in the first three months of
1951 is expected to be only slightly larger than in the same period last
year. The chief reason for this prospect is that the bulk of the increase
in the 1950 spring pig crop over the previous crop has been accounted for
by slaughter to date.

Beginning about the first of April, the number of hogs slaughtered
will be considerably larger than a year earlier. The increase will reflect
the 9 percent more pigs saved in the 1950 fall pig crop than in the fall
crop of 1949. Most of the pigs born in the fall reach market between March
and early September.

Slaughter YWeights
Up Seasonally

Weights of hogs slaughtered have been increasing seasonally for
about four months. The average weight of barrows and gilts at 7 markets
for the week ending January 20 was 246 pounds, 34 pounds above the
212 pound average for the first week of September and 7 pounds above the
same January week last year,

Many of the hogs marketed in January were farrowed as long ago as
last April, having been held past the December low point in prices. Since
a 200 pound hog on full feed will gain about 50 pounds a month, such a
postponement in marketing increases average weights appreciably. The aver-
age weight of barrows and gilts is expected to increase for the next month
or so. Thereafter, receipts of lighter weight hogs from fall farrowings
will reduce the average market weights.


- 4 -







ULS-47


Hog Prices Up From
Mid- Dec emb er

Hog prices began to advance about the middle of December. Prices
continued upward during most of January, though at a slower rate than during
the last half of December, The average price of barrows and gilts at 7 mar-
kets for the week ending January 20 was $20.32, as compared with $19o37 a
month earlier and .$15.57 a year earlier.

Price Discounts For
Heavy Hos iden

Price discounts in January on hogs weighing over 240 pounds were
greater than during December but not as large as last January.

Seasonal trends in price discounts are closely related to seasonal
changes in supplies of hogs of various weights. Discounts are wide for
heavy hogs in January because more of the hogs marketed then are heavy.
The large supply of heavy hogs in January is made up mostly of heavy barrows
and gilts* Few sows are slaughtered in that month. This is the opposite of
the situation in mid-summer, when discounts are again wide but almost all
the heavy hogs are sows,

Despite the widening discounts this January, producers who held hogs
for the price advance beginning in mid-December generally gained by doing
so. The over-all increase in hog prices was so sharp that heavy hogs sold
for more per 100 pounds in January than did medium hogs in early December,
This observation confirms the rule that seasonal' changes in discounts are
not alone a sufficient guide to producers in their choice of times to mar-
ket their hogs, but should be considered along with seasonal changes in
over-all prices, Past experience has shown that when the corn-hog ratio is
average or above, producers having hogs weighing 200-225 pounds in December
and early January can, in most years, profitably hold them three or four
weeks longer and put on 40-50 pounds gain in weight. The same is true for
producers having hogs weighing 200-225 pounds in May and Juneo In August
to October, however, it is seldom profitable to hold hogs long after they
reach 200-225 pounds, regardless of the relative price of corn and hogs.

Cattle Slaughter Decreases
Seasonally; Fed Cattle Still
Dominate Marketings

Cattle slaughter was seasonally smaller in January than at its recent
high in early December but slightly above a year earlier Slaughter for
the first quarter of 1951 may be a little larger than in the same quarter
last year.

Marketings of well-finished cattle are still a relatively big part of
slaughter supplies. Because of them, average slaughter weights in recent
months have been about 30 pounds above same months of the previous year.
The total number of cattle slaughtered under Federal inspection in all of
1950 was 1 percent less than in 1949, but due to the heavier weights the
year's inspected beef production was slightly larger. Similarly, heavy
weights have been a principal factor in a larger beef production thus far in
1951 than in the same period of 1950, Numbers of well-finished cattle slaugh.
tered and average weights for all cattle are likely to hold above the levels
of last winter.


- 6 -





JANUARY 1951


- 6 -


Prices iA Most For
WelI-Fin Tshed Cattle

Prices of slaughter cattle trended moderately higher in January fol-
lowing a sharp uptrend late in December.. The December rise was confined
mainly to the top grades but in January prices of all grades advanced.
In early January, for the first time in almost a year, several carloads of
top quality slaughter steers sold at Chicago for $40.00 per 100.pounds.
The average price of Prime steers at Chicago for the week ending January 18
was $38.52, $2.40 higher than a month earlier for the comparable grade, and
the average price for Utility steers was up $2.39 from a month earlier.
Compared with the first week in December, however, Prime steers had advanc-
ed $3.51 and Utility steers $2.24. (For a discussion of comparable grade
names in 1950 and 1951, see page 11.)

Prices of slaughter cows, bulls, heifers, and vealers also continued
upward in January and at the end of the third week of the month were at or
near record high levels.

Number of Cattle On
Feed a New High

The 4,656,000 cattle reported on feed January 1 this year are 208,000
head or 5 percent more than the number on feed last January. The number
this year is the largest on record, surpassing the previous high of
January 1, 1949. In the Corn Belt, the number on feed this year is 2 per-
cent larger than last. Indiana, Michigan and North Dakota are the only
North Central States in which fewer cattle are on feed than last year.
Feeding in the West is up 15 percent. ITcreases were reported for all
western States except Idaho, New Mexico and Nevada. California reported
248,000 head of cattle on feed, 27 percent more than last year. (Table 1i)

Cattle on Feed Again
ight in Weight

Cattle on feed in the Corn Belt were slightly lighter in weight this
January 1 than last and much lighter than two years ago. Weights are light-
er because an unusually large number of them were calves or light weight
steers.

Feeders reported that they intend to market about the same proportion
of their fed cattle by April 1 this year as last. The increased number of
cattle on feed may thus result in larger marketing of fed cattle both dur-
ing late winter and in the spring and following seasons as well.

Record Prices Paid For
Stooker and Feeder Cattle

Prices for feeder cattle advanced in January as a result of a strong
demand to refill feed lots and the seasonally reduced supplies. The average
price of all steers shipped to the country from 5 markets passed $30.00 in
early January, a new record price. They were about $8.60 higher than a year
earlier.




LMS-V7 7 *

Table 1.- Number of cattle and calves, and sheep and lambs, on feed
January 1, by regions, 1935 to date


Cattle and oalves


1Y4 -_


2: N xortn kenTral States : rexas :
: Penn- :ast ie ort Cenr: and :
Year :sylvanias North t" 3 Corn : -4 Okla-.
____ : _____ :Centrals Belt .1/ Plains 2/8 homa .
: 1,000 I000 1,000 1,000 1,000
: head head head head head


1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951


a

I


a
a
I
S
2
I
I
U
0
3
U


76
84
84
92
78
74
72
70
80
75.
70
82
90
85
88
88
84


579
750
740
840
855
944
1,002
961
993
905
907
888
961
850
939
976
967


890
1,130
947
1,199
1,166
1,330
1,509
1,521
1,612
1,517
1,642
1,500
1,552
1,250
1,501
1,564
1,598


339
640
333
452
530
522
639
772
928
802
1,020
948
904
744
965
909
963


60
145
125
192
194
194
230
251
264
172,
210'
166
171
165
214
216
235


Western States :
. rtUnited
Cali :. Other :States
fornia Westernt
1,000 1,000 1,000
head head head


71
100
138
152
125
163
169.
128
154
134
125
149
166
209
258
196
248


200
353
392
409-
355
406
444
482
414
410
437
478
463
518
565
499
561


2,215
3,202
2,759
3,336
3,303
3,633
4,065
4,185
4,445
4,015
4,411
4,211
'4,307
3,821
4,530
S4,448
4,656


.5heep ani


Belt States 4/
,est


1,000oo
head


2,330
2,085
1,590
1,913
2,007
1,987
2,492
2,761
3,260
2,931.
3,404
3,182
2,872
2,003
1,771
1.649
1,582


d lambs
western n Ne-w : United
States 5/ : York- : States


1,000
head


1,000
head,


2,249
2,389
2,754
2,765
2,639
2,6 42
2,744
2,978
2,596
2,506
2,521
2,585
1,965
1,983
1,510
1,352
1,235


1,000
head

5,669
5,701
5,597
6,091
5,885
5,841
6,479
6,867
6,954
6,512
6,911
6,837
5,693
4,851
4,003
3,644
3,440


1 Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri. j2/ North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska,
ansas, Y/ Preliminarye 4 North Central States, except North Dakota.
5 Eight mountain States, three'Paoifie States, Texas, Oklahoma, and
North Dakota.


11 Corn
Esast
1,000
head


1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951


S
S
3
3
I
S
2*

2
U
S
S
I
I
2
S


1,040
1,177
-1,203
1,368
1,194
1,172
1,186
1,083
1,049
1,031
950
1,033
821
840
697
623
604


m4 ....


.. ..... ............ m l ml I ....... .




JANUARY 1951


Shipments of feeder battle this winter have been large for the
season. Receipts at 8 Corn Belt States were up 12 percent in November and
27 percent in December from the previous year. Shipments from 5 markets in
January were larger than those last January.

Fed Lamb Marketings Season*
a21y 72ages to Decline

Sheep and lamb slaughter increased during January from.its holiday
low, but it was smaller than last January. It included large.marketings of
fed lambs. Unusually early placements of lambs on feed last fall caused
marketing from feed lots to be earlier than usual. Sheep and lamb slaugh-
ter is expected to decline seasonally as the major feeding season is conm-
plated, and to remain moderately below 1950 levels for the next few months.

Sheep and Lamb
Prices Record High

Prices of sheep and lambs continued to move up during January as
demand for all classes was strong. Wooled Good and Choice slaughter lambs
at Chicago averaged $34.86 the week ending January 20, $11.81 above the same
week in 1950 and higher than the-previous- record price for either wooled or
spring lambs. Prices of mature sheep continued to set new highs almost each
succeeding week. Shorn Good and Choice ewes at Chicago for the week ending
January 80 averaged $19.70 as compared with $16.20 a month earlier and
$12.45 a year earlier.

Fewer Sheep and Lambs
on VeeT Janury

: The 3,440,000 sheep on feed January 1 this year was 204,000 head or
6 percent less than a year ago, and the smallest number on feed since 1920.
Reductions from last year were due primarily to the fewer lambs saved in
1950 than in 1949 and the relatively larger number retained for stock sheep.

In the Corn Belt, -only Nebraska and Illinois reported increases in
lambs on feed this January 1. Nebraska,showed a sharp increase in feeding
due largely to the shift -of lambs from Kansas wheat pastures. Deterioration
of wheat pastures in the Great Plains States caused:considerable shifting of
lambs this fall and winter to alternative pasture areas or to feed lots, or
sometimes resulted in early marketing for slaughter.

Five of the western States had more lambs on feed than last year,
though fewer than in previous years. In Colorado, the leading western feed-
ing State, the number of lambs on feed reached a new low in 40 years of
record, and the reduction there from 1950 was greater than the combined in-
crease in the five other States.

Prices of feeder lambs have set record highs in recent weeks. The
average price at Omaha for the week ending January 6, the latest week for
which a price was reported, was $31.25 per 100 pounds, well above the $23506
the same week in January 1960.


- 8 .





LMS-47


1951 Total Meat Production
To d 1950

Prospects are for a larger meat production in 1951 than in 1950.
The greatest gain will probably be in pork, which will be upped by the
9 percent increase in the 1950 fall pig crop over the 1949 fall crop, and
the 6 percent more pigs indicated for this spring than last. Prospects are
that slaughter weights of hogs may be slightly heavier than in 1950, and
will contribute to more pork.

A moderate increase over 1950 is also likely in output of beef.
There will probably be less lamb and mutton this year then last. No great
change is expected in output of veal.

The increase in supplies of pork and beef will provide for larger
military demands for meat and may allow civilian meat consumption to in-
crease by about 3 pounds per person over the 145 pounds consumed per person
in 1950.

January 1 Meat Stocks
Y 9 Percent

The into-storage movement of almost a quarter billion pounds of
meat during December brought total cold storage holdings of all classes
of meats on January 1 to 791 million pounds. These holdings were about
66 million pounds or 9 percent greater than those a year earlier.

With meat production in December at a peak for the year, each kind
of meat showed a net gain in storage stocks in that month. The movement
of 192 million pounds of pork into commercial storage was larger than a
year earlier and was about in line with the increase in pork production
over a year earlier. Total pork holdings of 518 million pounds on
January 1 was 9 percent above last year. Beef stocks were increased at
about the seasonal rate. The January holding was well above last year
but still below the 1945-49 average. Frozen veal and frozen lamb and
mutton in storage on January 1 were below last year and well below the
average of the last five years.

Meat Prices Rise Further;
Controls Established January 26

Retail prices of meats generally advanced in late December and
early January. Price rises, particularly for pork, often occur at that
season because of the seasonal decrease in slaughter, On January 26, the
Economic Stabilization Agency announced price controls on meat at whole-
sale and retail. Ceilings named were the highest price of the period from
December 19 to January 25. No control was placed on prices of live
animals,


- 9 g





JANUARY 1951 -- 6 10 -

Bans Removed on Imports of
earned Meats from Mexico
Continue on Fresh Meat
and Live Cattle

Effective December 30D 1950 certain canned and cooked meats and meat
food products were permitted entry into the United States from Mexico for
domestic consumption. Imports .of fresh, chilled or frozen meats and of live
animals are still prohibited from Mexico as well as from all countries in
which foot-and-mouth disease is known to exist.

Unlike the fresh products, trade in canned meat is determined by
whether the shipping country has a system of sanitary inspection that con-
forms to minimum United States standards. The Mexican system has been found
acceptable.

The United States border was closed to imports of fresh beef and live
cattle from Mexico on December 26, 1946 as part of the joint program for con-
trol and eradication of foot-and-mouth disease in Mexico, Thereafter, many
of the cattle formerly shipped to the United States were slaughtered in meat
canning plants in northern Mexico. As part of the over-all program, the
United States agreed to purchase much of this canned beef, but only for re-
export to foreign countries. Exports of canned meat from Mexico to the
United States under this program reached an annual peak of 83 million pounds
in 1949 but have been negligible since February 1950 (table 2).

Table 2*- Exports of canned meat from Mexico, by years 1946 to 1949,
and January-July 1950

:"" Country of immediate destination
Year : United : O : Tt
States Other Total
: States 1/ : :
: Thousand pounds Thousand pounds Thousand pounds

1946 3,792 24 3,816
1947 2 10,970
1948 64,996 4 65,000
1949 83,363 11 83,374
1950
January-July: 13,195 J/ 13,195

/Mexican canned meat was held in storage or was in transit in the
United States for distribution under foreign relief programs. 2/ Not
available. 3 Less than 500 pounds.
Foreign Crops and Markets, Office of Foreign Agricultural Relations.

The three-year quarantine, vaccination, and slaughter program carried
on jointly by MIexico and the United States has done much toward bringing
foot-and-mouth disease in Mexico under control. A recent local outbreak of
the disease has postponed the removal of restrictions on imports of fresh
beef and live cattle into the United States.

Mexico has in the past been more important as a source of feeder
cattle than of slaughter cattle or meat, Around 500,000 feeder cattle and
calves were imported yearly.





- 11 -


Canada Lifts Restrictions
On Pork Shipments

The Canadian Government has announced that import and export restrict-
ions on pork and pork products to and from Canada have been lifted. This
action ends a three-year prohibition on entry of United States pork into
Canada. It also ends controls on Canadian exports of pork, which were sig-
nificant mainly in relation to Canada's pork contracts with Great Britain.
For several months export licenses had been granted rather freely to
Canadian exporters for secondary pork products such as cooked hams, bacon,
tenderloins and other processed pork.

With the removal of restrictions on pork shipments,trading in live-
stock and meats between Canada and the United States now depends largely on
the relative price differentials between the two countries, as modified by
import duties and tariff quotas. Controls on exports of live and dressed
cattle and sheep were removed by the Canadian Government in August 1948.

It is not anticipated that the lifting of export and import restrict-
ions on pork will result in a large volume of trading in that meat between
the two countries. Exports of pork from the United States to Canada aver-
aged 21.0 million pounds, product weight, annually in 1937-41, and imports
from Canada were 8.4 million pounds.

Imports of New Zealand
Meat Plan.ned

Plans have been completed for shipping 11.2 million pounds of meat
from New Zealand to the United States and Canada in late January or early
February, the Office of Foreign Agricultural Relations has announced.
Four shipments of 2 million pounds each to the United States are proposed,
a total of 8 million pounds* The New Zealand :'ieat Producers' Board will
act as selling agent and sales in the United States will be handled by
designated agents. Originally only the export of manufacturing meat, pre-
sumably ewe carcasses, was considered but the proposed shipment will include
quantities of other meats. All shipments will be made to the east coast of
the United States. They represent an attempt to lay a foundation for a
permanent meat trade with North America.

Federal Grade Standards For
Slaughter Cattle Changed

Effective December 30 the Federal grade standards for slaughter
cattle were revised. The changes were made primarily to bring the slaughter
grades into line with new grades for steer, heifer and cow carcasses that
were put into effect December 29. (See Livestock and Meat Situation for
December 1950, page 16.)

The changes include: (1) The old Prime and Choice slaughter grades
are combined under the name Prime. (2) For slaughter steers and heifers
the old Good grade is renamed Choice. (3) A new Good grade is set up for
young steers and heifers formerly included in the top half of the old Medium
grades (4) The new Commercial grade includes the remainder of the steers
and heifers in the old Medium grade. For cows, the new Commercial grade in-
oludes animals formerly grading Good or in the upper half of the old Medium
grade and is the top grade for cows. (5) The old Common grade is renamed
Utility.


LMS-47





JANUARY 1951


- 12 -


While these changes affect Federal grades for slaughter steers,
heifers and cows, the names for two grades of bulls and stags are also
changed, For both these classes the old Medium grade is renamed Commercial
and -the Common grade renamed Utility. The old Good grade of bulls and stags
is unchanged.

Official market news reports have been on the basis of these new -
grades since January 1. While no official grading of live animals is done
by the United States Department of Agriculture, the grades are available as
guides, and do form the basis for uniform reporting in official market
reports. ... F.

Western Winter Range
Conditions About Average

Range feed conditions were about average during December for the
western ranges as a whole. In general, January 1 conditions varied from
good in the northern part of this area to poor in the southern part, where
some areas of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and Nevada were experiencing a
drouth. Western ranges were mostly open during December and supplemental
feeding was limited mostly to the dry areas. As a result, livestock have
maintained about average condition ratings, and on January 1 were reported in
about the same condition as a.year earlier. Early lambing conditions have
been favorable in Arizona and California but ewe bands are generally below
average condition in the early spring lamb areas of Texas and New Mexico.

Meat Marketing Charges in 1950
Nearly the Same as 1949;
Prices Higher

The average retail price of meat and the farm value of live animals
increased- in .1950 over 1949, but the marketing margin was more nearly stable,
according to estimates of this Bureau. I/ On an all-meat basis, the average
retail price of meat in 1950 at.59 cents was about 3 cents a pound higher
than a year earlier. The farm value of live animals (as corrected for value
of products other than meats, such as hides pnd pelts) showed close to the
same increase as the retail price. The marketing margin -- the spread between
the two prices -- thus changed little, holding its previous postwar level.

The apparent stability of marketing charges and the increase in prices
resulted in an increase in the percent of the consumers' meat dollar received
by farmers. The farmers' share of the retail meat dollar in 1950 is estimat-
ed as 62.3 cents, 2.1 cents above the share in 1949. Previously the farmers'
share had declined each year since 1945, when it was affected by price con-
trols and subsidy payments, but the share in each postwar year was consider-
ably above the 1937-41 average of 50 cents.

1/ Basic data published in Been, R. 0., Price Spreads Between Farmers and
Consumers, Agricultural Information Bulletin No, 4, BAE, USDA, Washington,
1949; and in the monthly Marketing asd Transportation Situation.


__Nl






- 13 -


An increase in the farmers' share is indicated for each kind of meat.
For pork, the average retail price, the farm value and the marketing margin
all declined slightly. The farmers' share of the retail pork dollar increas-
ed a little. For beef, the retail price (reported as Good grade, now Choice)
and the farm value advanced substantially in 1950 from 1949 end the marketing
charge increased moderately. The farmers' share of the beef dollar rose
about 2 cents. For lamb, retail and farm prices increased but the marketing
margin decreased, and the farmers' share of the lamb dollar rose 3 cents
(tables 3 and 4).

Retail price data used in these comparisons are derived from average
prices for individual cuts of meat reported by the U. S. Bureau of Labor Sta-
tistics. The prices for beef and for lamb are simply averages of prices of
carcass outs, of a specified grade, and do not include prices of edible by.
products or processed products. The pork series includes an allowance for
edible byproducts and minor pork products on a fresh basis. Price data for
all meat combined include estimates for miscellaneous processed or canned
meat products and sausages and, in the case of beef, they apply more nearly
to all grades and qualities of the meat and live animals sold in any year
than do data for the individual meat. For these reasons, price and margin
data for all meats do not reflect exactly the trends for individual meats.

Price comparisons between the live animal and retail meat may also
be made from datu of the Production and Marketing Administration for Chicago
and New York. In general, the PMA data show about the same change from 1949
to 1950 as do BAE United States average data in the case of pork, but indi-
oate a somewhat greater increase than do BAE averages in the marketing
charge for beef. Both PMA and BAE data point to some increase in margins
in the second half of 1950 compared with the first half, particularly in
margins for beef.

The net farm value as calculated for BAE data is the value of a
quantity and grade of live animal equivalent to a retail pound of meat, as
adjusted to eliminate the imputed value of inedible byproducts and, in
certain years, for Government payments to producers and for processing
taxes. For example, the farm value of 2.16 pounds of slaughter lamb less
an allowance for inedible byproducts obtained from the live animal is com-
pared with the retail price of one pound of lamb at retail.

The marketing charge per pound of meat is the difference between the
retail price and the net farm value. This charge or margin covers cost and
profits of the entire marketing process including the transportation, mar-
keting and slaughter of livestock and the processing, transportation,
wholesaling and retailing of meat. Many of these marketing costs such as
labor, rents, materials and supplies, transportation charges, taxes and
interest are relatively fixed over short periods of time. For this reason
marketing charges tend to change more slowly and to continue a trend in one
direction longer than do meat and livestock prices. They are particularly
likely to be relatively stable during a period of sharply changing meat and
livestock prices, such as those in the spring of 1950.


LMS-47








JAMtUARY 1951


Table 3.- Average retail price of meats, farm value and marketing cha
by years 1937-50, by months 1950


rge, per retail pound,


: Marketing
: charge 4/

Cents


:: Government :
:: payments :
z: to prod- :
:8 ucers 5/ :
Cents


All meat products


By years:
1937
1933
1939 :
1940
"1941
1942 ..
1943
1944 :Z
1945
1946
1947
1948 '
1949
1950 71 :
By months, 1950:
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept. :
Oct.
Nov. :


By years:
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950 7/
By months, 1950:
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.


28.5
25.1
24.4
23.3
26.6
30.9
32.0
30.4
30.0-
.38.5
55.4
62.0
56,0
59.1

S3.2
1.5
E4.3
54.5
57.9
60.4
63.0
63.8
63.9
'61.4
60.8


13.7
12.0
11.6
11.4
15.1
L9.7
21.6
20.1
21.8
26.3
35.4
39.0
33.7
36.8

31.1
33.2

34.0
37.3
37.4
40.3
39,9
40.0
38.4
38.2


14.8
13.1
12.8
11.9
11.5
11.2
10.4
10.3
8.2
12.2
20.0
23.0
22.3
22.3

22.1
20.3
20.8
20.5
20.6
23.0
22.7
23.9
23.9
23.0
22.6


14.8
13.1
12.8
11.9
11.5
11.2
11.5
12.2
11.0
14.0
20.0
23.0
22.3
22.3


22.1
20.53
20.8
20.5
20.6
23.0
22.7
23.9
23.9
23.0
22.5


Beef reported as Good grade now Choice)


31.6
27.9
28.6
28.7
30.7
34.1
35.2
33.4
32.7
41.8
61.1
73.7
66.8
73.6

67.1
66.8
67.6
68.1
72.2
75.5
77.9
77 .8"-
77.2
76.3
76.4


19.3
14.7
15.7
16.9
18.6
23.0
25.7
26.3
26.4
33.2
44.2
53.0
45.6
51.7


50.1
50.1
49.3
48.8
51.0
52.0
52.4
51.6
52.7
52.6
54.6


12.3
13.2
12.9
11.8
12.1
11.1
9.5
7.1
6.3
8.6
16.9
20.7
21.2
21.9

17.0
16.7
18.3
19.3
21.2
23.5
25.5
26.2
24.5
23.7
21.8


12.3
13.2
12.9
11.8
12.1
11.1
10.6
9.1
10.2
11.2
16.9
20.7
21.2
21.9

17.0
16.7.
18.3
19.3
21.2
23.5
25.5
26.2
24.5
23.7
21.8


1/ Calculated from "market basket" of 335.4 pounds of meat and meat products consisting of 135.6 pounds of
beef, 16.7 pounds of lamb, 157.5 pounds of pork, including lard, and 25.6 pounds of other meat products.
Source material reported in Price Spreads Between Farmers and Consumers, 1933-49, USDA Agricultural Infor-
mation Bulletin No. 4, November 1949 and current issues of The Marketing and Transportation Situation.
/ Farm value of live animal weight and grade necessary to produce 1 pound of meat products at retail minus
he computed value of byproducts other than the edible byproducts included in the average retail price of
all meat products. Standard factors are 2.16 pounds of cattle to produce 1 pound of beef at retail,
2.16 pounds of live lambs to produce 1 pound of lamb at retail, and 1.41 pounds live hog to produce 1 pound
of pork and lard at retail. (Footnotes continued on pagel5.)


Year
or
month


.Retail :
price l/ :

Cent s


Net farm
value 2/

Cents


Margin


Cents


: Government
: processor
: payments
C: 3/
Cents


Adjusted
farm
value
6/
Cents


0.2
0.2


13,7
12.0
11.6
11.4
15.1
19.7
21.6
20.1
22.0
26.5
35.4
39.0
33.7
36.8

31.1
33.2
33.5
34.0
37.3
37.4
40.3
39.9
40.0
38.4
38.2


19.3
14.7
15.7
16.9
18.6'
23.0
25.7.
26.3
26.8
33.5
44.2
53.0
45.6
51.7

50.1
50.1
49.3
48.8
51.0
52.0
52.4
51.6
52.7
52.6
54.6


- 14 -











Table 3.- Average retail price of meats, farm value and rar; .. ii, char
by years ] -,'_', by months 1950 (Cont'd.)


Ie, per retail pound,


Yenr Retail : .Net farm
or price 1/ value .
month -
,'-' r '1 s ".n "t]


: ovirr icrijt
: processor
Margin : .,nts
: /


Cents


,ernts


Pork, including lard


By years:
ly37
1938
1939 *
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950 7/
By months,
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Snpt.
Oct.
Nov.


By years:
1937
1938
193S
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950 J/
By months,
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
No v.


1950s
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:


24.2
21.1.
18.9
16.5
21.2


25.6
25.6
33.4
47.2
47.5
41.1
40.7

35.7
36.4
37.1
36.6
7 9.5
40.8
43.7
46.0
46.6
42.8
41.2


1'. :'
10.8
8,8
7.5
] .7
18.?
h;.:

18.2
19.6
24.0
33.6
32.4
.- .4
25.3

21.0
23.1
22.4
21.7
25.7
24.7
29.9
30.0
29.3
26.7
24.7


10.7,
10.3
10.1
9.0

6.0

7.4
6.0
9.4
13.6
15.1
15.7
15.4

14.7
13.3
14.7
14.9
13.6
16.1
13.8
16.0
17.3
16.1
16.5


Lamb


: 2
: 2
: 2
: 24
: 2
: 3
: 31
: 31
: 31
4;
: 5

: 6
S6
6!
1950:
6;
: 6
: 6
: 6
7(
S7
7;
: 7(
7:

: 6
7:


8.4
6.4
6.4
6.1
7.8
2.4
5.9
5.1
5.2
2.1
6.7
4.3
7.4
9.5

2.8
3.6
5.8
9.2
0.7
4.0
3.0
0.7
1.0
9.3
1.2


14.5
12.3
13.2
13.4
15.4
19.2
21.9
21.2
22.0
26.8
37.3
42.1
41,4
44.6

38.3
40.1
42.7
43.4
46.4
47.5
46.3
45.7
45.6
44.9
46.3


13.9
14.1
13.2
12.7
12.4
13.2
14.0
13.9
13.2.
15.3
19.4
22.2
26.0
24.9

24.5
23.5
23.1.
25.8
24.3
26.5
26.7
25.0
25.4
24.4
24.9


0.9
1.6
0.9


3/ Government paym ents werr- made to slaughterers of hogs, cattle, calves, sneep and labs beginning June
1943 and continuing for most classes through June 1946, and again in September and the first half of October
1946.
4/ "Adjusted margin". Equal margin plus Government payments to slaughterers.
Government payments to hog producers in 1933-36 were made under the AAA hog and corn reduction program.
In 1945 and 1946 payments were made to sheep and lamb producers for sheep and lambs sold for immediate
slaughter and payments previously made to processors of sheep and lambs were withdrawn. Also in 1945 and
the first half of 1946 payments were made to farmers for cattle sold for immediate slaughter at weights
above 800 pounds and prices above designated amounts.
/ Not farm value plus Government payments to livestock producers.
/ Preliminary estimate.


! i.'ar-ker r.. ::
: charge 4/

Cents


o'vrrr:-' nt
payments
to prod-
u(crs S/


Ad ust ed
farn
value
6/
f Cents


10.7
10.3
10.1
9.0
1.1
8.0
9.0
9.2
8.2
10.8
13.6
15.1
15.7
'15.4

14.7
13.3
S14.7
14.9
13.6
16.1
13.8
16.0
'17.3
16.1
16.5


13.5
10.8
8,8
7.5
12.7
18.2
19.2
18.2
19.6
24.0
33.6
32.4
25.4
25.3

21.0
23.1
22.4
21.7
25.7
24.7
29.9
30.0
29.3
26.7
24.7


1.4
2.2


13.9
14.1
13.2
12.7
12.4
13.2
14.9
15.5
14.1
15.3
19.4
22.2
.26.0
24.9

24.5
23.5
23.1
25.8
24.3
26.5
26.7
25.0
25.4
24.4
24.9


14.5
12.3
13.2
13.4
15.4
19.2
21.9
21.2
23.4
29.0
37.3
42.1
41.4
44.6

38.3
40.1
42.7
43.4
46.4
47.5
46.3
45.7
45.6
44.9
46.3


- 1s -


LMS- 47






JANUARY 1951


- 16 -


Table 4.- Net farm value as percentage of retail price of meat products,
by years 1937-50, by months, 1950



Year All : (reported : Pork I
or meat : as Good : (including s Lamb
month r products : grade, : lard) :
_: :e- .now Choice) :
:- PeroeniT Percent Percent Percent


By years:

1937 48.1 61.1 55.8 51.1
1938 47.8 52.7 51.2 46.6
1939 : 47.5 54,9 46,6 50.0
1940 48,9 58.9 45.5 51,3
1941 56,8 60,6 59.9 55.4
1942 : 63,8 67,4 69.5 59.3
1943 1 67.5 73.0 70.6 61.0
1944 : 66,1 78*7 71.1 60.4
1945 2 : 72.7 80,7 76o6 62.5
1946 2 : 68,3 79,4 7109 63.7
1947 : 63.9 72,3 71.2 65,8
1948 62.9 71,9 68.2 65.5
1949 : 60.2 68,3 61.8 61.4
1950 5: 62.3 70.2 62.2 64.2


By months, 1950::

Jan, : 58,5 74o7 58,8 61.0
Feb. : 62.1 7590 63.5 63.1
Mar. : 61,7 72,9 60.4 64.9
Apr. : 62,4 71.7 59.3 62.7
May : 64.4 70.6 65.4 65.6
June : 61,9 68.9 60.5 64.2
July : 64.0 67.3 68.4 63.4
Aug. : 62,5 66.3 65.2 64.6
Sept. 62.6 68.3 62.9 64.2
Oct. 62.5 68,9 62.4 64.8
Nov. 62.8 71,5 60,0 65,0

1y In 1943-46 Government payments to slaughterers reduced the retail price
of meat and therefore increased the percentage of the retail price receiv-
ed by producers of livestock*
2 In 1945 and 1946 the total return to farmers ("adjusted farm value") was
a somewhat larger part of the retail price of beef, lamb, and all meat than
the figures shown here, because of Government payments made to feeders of
cattle and sheep.
Y/ Preliminary estimates.







Table 5.- Average retail price, farm value and marketing charges
for all meats combined, 1913-50 1/


: Net :
: farm :Ma
:value :
Cents C


(Data for cover page chart) ____________
:Government:Process- :Iarket- :Government zAdjust-
rgin:prooessor zing taxes ing payments to:ed farm
:payments: on hogs soharge t producers t value
ents Cents Cents Cents Cents Cents


Year :



1913
1914 :
1915 :
1916 s
1917
1918
1919 :
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925 :
1926 :
1927
1928
1929 :
1930
1931
1932
1933 :
1934 :
1935 z
1936 :
1937 :
1938 a
1939 :
1940
1941 :
1942 :
1943 :
1944
1945
1946 :
1947
1948 :
1949
1950


Retail
price
Cents

18.7
19.2
18.6
20.4
26.4
32.6
34,7
33.8
27,7
26.7
26.7
27.0
30.0
30.8
30e4
32.0
33.2
31.0
25.7
20.0
17.7
20.6
27.7
26.3
28.5
25.1
24.4
23.3
26*6
30.9
32.0
30.4
30.0
38.5
55.4
62.0
56,0
59.1


11.2
11.5
10.4
12,2
17.7
20.6
20.9
17.7
11.2
11.9
11.1
11.5
14.7
15.4
14.6
15,8
16.6
14,0
9.8
6.8
6.3
7.2
12.2
12,4
13.7
12,0
11.6
11.4
15.1
19.7
21.6
20.1
21,8
26.3
35.4
39.0
33.7
36,8


7.5
7.7
8.2
8.2
8.7
12,0
13.8
16.1
16.5
14.8
15.6
15.5
15.3
15.4
15.8
16.2
16.6
17.0
15.9
13.2
11.4
13.4
15.5
13.9
14.8
13.1
12.8
11.9
11.5
11.2
10.4
10.3
8.2
12.2
20.0
23.0
22.3
22.3


7o5
7.7
8.2
8.2
8.7
12.0
13,8
16.1
16.5
14.8
15.6
15,5
15.3
15.4
15.8
16.2
16,6
17.0
15.9
13.2
11.3
11.9
13.9
13.9
14,8
13.1
12.8
1109
11.5
11.2
11.5
12,2
11,0
14.0
20.0
23.0
22.3
22.3


11.2
11.5
10.4
12,2
17,7
2086
20.9
17.7
11,2
11.9
11.1
11.5
14.7
15.4
14.6
15.8
16,6
14,0
9.8
6,8
6.4
8.7
13.8
12.4
13.7
12,0
11.6
11#4
15.1
19,7
21,6
20.1
22.0
2605
35.4
39.0
33.7
36.8


.1
1.5
1.6









0.2
0.2


k For 1937-50 repeats data in first section of table 3.
See heading and footnotes of table 3 for explanation of data in each column.


01
1.5
1.6


11
1,9
2,8
1,8


m--


* 17 w


.IMS.47





JANUARY 1951 Z 18 -

PRICE MARGINS IN FEEDING'CATTLE, BY-GRADES, 1947-50-

by Harold F. Breimyer


Much of the profit in feeding cattle car be traced to the difference
between the price paid per hundredceight.for 'cattle as feeders and the price
received, after a normal feeding interval,. when they are sold as slaughter.
cattle. This price margin in feeding has varied considerably the last four
years according to the grade and types of cattle fed. It has averaged
larger for top than for lower grades of cattle fed, but it has also fluctu-
ated over a wider range for the top grades. Thus, cattle feeders have had
"more of a chance for a big price gain, and more-risk of loss, when they fed
the better grade cattle than when they fed the lower grades.

Because seasonal highs and lows in prices came at different times for
various grades of cattle, and because the feeding period is normally-longer
for top than for lower grades, price margins in 1947-50 for feeding the best
-grade were largest when the fed cattle were sold in the fall or early winter;
for the second best grade when sold in the summer or early falls and'for a
lower grade when sold in the spring or early summer.

Data on cattle prices and calculated margins for the postwar years
-1947-50 are presented and explained in the tables and text that follow.

Grades of Cattle and Systems of Feeding

In the Corn Belt many kinds of cattle are fed in many different ways.
Some are beef animals of finest breeding that are fed to high finish in a
carefully regulated feeding program. At the other extreme, even scrub dairy
'animals are sometimes given a small grain ration to prepare them for market.
'Some grain feeding programs are combined with extensive periods of grazing
-or roughage feedings Nevertheless, throughout these many forms there run
-certain systems of feeding that are sufficiently common and uniform that
they can be regarded as standard or typical.

Systems of cattle feeding can be classified according to the grade
and classes of cattle that are fed. This is possible because each kind of
cattle is most adapted to a particular system, and because grade and class
names for feeders and slaughter cattle fit the various'systems. The grade
specifications established for feeders are based not only on the appearance
of animals when graded, but also on their suitability for feeding to slaugh-
ter weight. Thus a lower grade feeder steer is well suited, as a general
rule, to feeding within a short period to a lower grade slaughter animal.
A top grade steer is suited to longer feeding with a top slaughter grade
as the objective.

In line with these distinctions, five feeding systems are presented
in this analysis. They consist of three that begin with yearling feeder
'steers and two that begin with feeder steer calves. In each, the feeding
ends at the slaughter grade comparable to the grade of the original feeder.
However, because only a single price is reported for feeder steer calves, a
combined grade of calves is separately compared with each of two grades of
slaughter steers.


-, -,^





LMS-47


- 19 -


Among specific modifications of these basic systems that may be
mentioned but are not treated here is up-grading or down-grading in feed-
ing. This is feeding to a slaughter grade higher or lower than the com-
parable grade as a feeder. Thus, lower grade feeders are sometimes fed a
long time to near a top slaughter grade. On the other hand, top grade
feeders are occasionally shipped half-fed as lower grade slaughter animals.
Furthermore, the systems discussed here do not apply directly to cattle
pastured before being moved into feed lots, or fed grain while on pasture.
They are set up only for cattle fed continuously on grain and roughage for
a stated length of time in drylot.

Methods of Calculating Margins

Calculating price margins in feeding begins with market prices of
feeders and of slaughter cattle. Prices at Kansas City, the leading feeder
cattle market, are used for feeders and those at Chicago for slaughter
steers. Prices are taken for the weight and grade classes in market quo-
tations that most nearly fit the five feeding systems selected for analysis.
For the three systems of feeding yearling steers, the three weight and grade
classes for feeders are 500-800 pound Choice, 500-800 pound Good, and 500-
1,000 pound Medium stocker and feeder steers. The three most nearly com-
parable grades and weights of slaughter steers, according to the grade
names in use during the years studied, are 900-1,100 pound Choice, 900-
1,100 pound Good, and 700-1,100 pound Medium Corn Belt steers sold for
slaughter. For the two systems of calf feeding, the only feeder calf
grade reported is Good and Choice stocker and feeder steer calves. Margins
for feeding these calves to top grade are calculated from the price of 900-
1,100 pound Choice slaughter steers (as previously named), and those for
feeding calves to the next best grade are calculated from the price of 900-
1,100 pound Good slaughter steers.

Names for grades of slaughter steers were changed at the beginning
of 1951, but those for feeder steers and steer calves were left unchanged.
All the data and analysis here are in terms of the names in effect prior
to 1951. The principle of feeding of steers or calves to a slaughter
grade comparable to their original feeder grade, which underlies the five
feeding systems, is represented in the old terminology by Choice feeders
fed to Choice slaughter cattle, Good to Good, and so on. Observations made
from the 1947-50 experiences can still be applied to the same kind of feed-
ing, but in terms of 1951 names the slaughter grade will be raised one
level 2/.

Feeding margins are calculated as the difference-between the prices
of slaughter cattle when sold and of feeder cattle several months earlier.
The length of feeding period is different for each grade. For Choice year-
ling steers it is considered to be eight months, for Good yearling steers
it is six months, and for Medium steers, four months. For Good and Choice'
steer calves carried to Choice slaughter grade it is assumed to be 11 months,
and for Good grade is eight months.

2/ The detail in changes of names of slaughter steers is as follows:
Formerly Now
Prime and Choice Prime
Good Choice
Medium, divided into (Commerial
Commommon Uteriital
Common Utility




JANUARY 1951


Feeding margins so calculated are strictly price comparisons on a
hundredweight basis. They do not directly relate to net returns per animal
since the feed and other farm costs are not considered. Nor are transpor-
tation and marketing costs between Kansas City and the farm included, or
those between the farm and Chicago* Feeding and other costs differ some-
what by grades. The feeding margin is very important in cattle feeding
since much of the profit in feeding comes from successful methods of buy-
ing and marketing which provide favorable margins. Mistakes in marketing
can take away the profits that would otherwise be earned from efficiency
in putting on weight gains.

Feeding Margins and Their Variability by Grades

In 1947-50, margins in feeding of yearling steers averaged largest
,for the Choice'and smallest for the Medium grade. Margins also varied most
for the Choice grade. The chances of very profitable margins or of no
margin or even negative margins thus were greater when the top grade rather
than a lower grade of steers was selected for feeding.

These comparisons appear in the charts on page 22. The lowest
section presents feeding margins derived from the actual prices of the
upper three sections. When margins were generally high the margin for
Choice steers exceeded that for other grades, but in the low-margin period
of early 1949 the margins for Choice were smallest, ar were negatives
Margins for Medium steers as a rule were smaller but they dropped least dur-
ing 'a slump*

The actual margins in 1947-50 are not truly representative of a long
period. Prices of cattle were unusually high in those years Moreover,
prices trended upward most of that time except the second half of 1948,
allowing feeders to realize margins wider than were expected when feeding
began -- and wider than a long-run average. But even-though the general
size of margins is not representative, their differences by grades of cattle
fed are probably very nearly so. The experiences in those years are fairly
indicative of usual differences in price margins for the several systems of
feeding.

For all the 48 months of the period studied, the average price margin
in feeding Choice yearling steers was $8.49 per 100 pounds, for the. Good
grade was $6.74 and for the Medium grade was $4.59 (table 8)o Data for
those months also demonstrate the larger variations in margins for the
higher grades. The average variation in the margin -- the average departure
from the margins of $8.49, $6.74 and 4,59 -- was $3.44 per 100 pounds for
the Choice grade, $2.61 for Good, and $1,88 for Mediums

Margins for top grades of steers vary most for two reasons First,
prices of the higher grades of both feeder and slaughter steers fluctuate
more than do those of lower grades, as is shown by the greater dipping and
rising of price curves in the upper section of the chart than in the lower
sections. The second reason is that even if the pattern were no different,
the net cumulative price change while top cattle are being fed would usual-
ly be larger than for lower grades due simply to the longer period involved.


- 20 -











Table 6.- Price of simurhti'. steers at Chicago and of stookers and feeders at Kan as :it t* nd lagged irnin,
for fr.,!it., y-nr ing steers and steer calves, by grades, by months 1947 to date

S1-1.7 1948 1: 949 'E: i "
:Price per 10,' : ,rrin, : rioe per 100 lb. ldrGin, :Price per 130 lb. : I''r:'-n, : rtl e -,er 1. IL.. : .W.r in,
S :: trice of : 3 :prico of : I :rice of 3 : price of
S slaughterr : e slaughterr: t Feeder :slaughter: : slaughter
Month :Slaughter: Feeder steers :'iu1u-.ter: Feeders, steers :Slaughter: ateers i steers :'1u.hters: t : teers
steers, : 3 less : steers, : r less : steers, : less 3 steers, : strs z loes
Chicago : aCit : earlier Chicago : city t earlier : Chioago City earlier 3 Chioago i n* : earlier
City : price of : iy price of ity price oty : prioe of
a a :feeders 1/: i feeders t 3 : feeders : i: feeders
SDollars Dollare Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollar

Prices and Margin in Yearling Steers
S. Choice 900-1,100 lb. laughter steerse Choice 500-800 lb. feeder steers, 8 months feeding 2/


Jan. t 28.06
Feb. 1 26.66
Mar. 1 26.98
Apr. : 25.87
May s 26.04
June 1 27.46
July 1 29.79
Aug. 1 31.74
Sept. 352.83
Oct. : $3.15
Nov. s 33.70
Dec. S 35.64


18.63 11.33 36.70 27.73 14.24 30.81 24.46 1.65 36.80 24.84
19.358 9.68 32.59 25.61 9.97 26.66 23.17 -2.38 35.76 26.16
20.86 10.19 30.44 26.60 7.66 27.27 26.20 -1.92 33.79 26.86
21.17 9.00 30.90 27.66 8.08 27.06 26.63 -2.74 32.00 27.44
22.46 8.66 33.08 29.16 9.73 27.12 25.99 -1.71 31.86 29.23
22.62 9.02 36.74 29.03 13.49 28.16 26.40 0.87 31.68 29.97
22.78 12.01 38.88 29.19 14.78 27.63 24.00 0.59 32.06 30.29
22.82 13.36 39.78 29.80 14.04 28.29 23.80 1.98 31.58 30.36
23.35 14.20 39.15 28.83 11.42 31.65 23.74 7.09 32.21 30.97
23.25 13.75 37.95 27.28 12.34 34.52 24.31 11.35 32.34 30.68
24.10 12.85 37.21 27.04 10.61 36.27 23.86 10.07 33.59 31.77
25.74 14.47 34.12 26.31 6.57 37.49 24.18 11.86 36.45 32.43


i Good 900.1,100 b. slaughter steers, Good 500-800 lb. feeder steers, 6 months feeding 2/


Jan. s 24.17
Feb. s 24.31
Mar. s 24.57
Apr. 1 23.67
May 1 24.46
June : 25.67
July : 27.40
Aug. s 27.68
Sept. 1 28.48
Out. 28.91
NOT. : 28.87
Dec. 1 30.13


16.83
18.08
19.22
19.23
20.26
20.40
20.63
20.70
21.11
20.60
21.855
23.28


8.67 31.15 24.38 10.52 26.10 21.96
9.27 27.66 22.89 6.96 23.34 20.86
8.55 27.07 24.40 5.96 24.47 23.69
6.98 28.08 24.90 7.48 24.71 23.25
8.45 30.78 26.36 9.23 25.16 23.97
9.10 34.80 26.53 11.52 26.39 23.47
10.87 35,80 26.81 11.42 25.81 21.84
9.50 35.50 27.09 12.61 26.29 21.46
9.26 33.85 26.67 9.45 27.74 21.42
9.68 32.20 24.08 7.30 29.55 21.25
8.61 31.50 24.06 5.14 30.07 21.34
9.73 29.25 23.56 2.72 31.18 21.75


-0.71 30.62 22.52
-3.75 29.72 23.58
-1.20 28.88 24.60
0.63 28.35 25.28
1.10 29.43 27.30
2.83 29.91 27.73
3.85 30.49 28.61
5.43 29.98 28.61
4.05 30.28 29.04
6.30 30.22 28.54
6.10 31.49 29.67
7.71 33.51 30.21


I Medium 700-1,100 lb. slaughter steers, Medium 500-1,000 lb. feeder steers, 4 months feeding 2/


Jan. s 19.19
Feb. t 20.26
Mar. c 20.68
Apr. t 19.92
May 1 21.10
June t 22.43
July t 22.39
Aug. 1 20.47
Sept. r 21.14
Oct. t 21.64
Nov. s 22.15
Deo. t 23.30


14.60
15.52
16.67
16.93
17.47
17.31
17.57
17.33
17.76
17.13
18.10
20.05


5.19 25.54 20.72 7.78 22.40 19.20
5.93 23.71 19.38 6.58 20.52 18.31
7.06 24.19 21.02 6.09 22.66 21.17
5.64 25.05 21.68 5.00 22.87 20.94
6.50 27.48 22.69 6.76 23.61 21.71
6.91 29.50 22.85 10.12 24.18 20.81
5.72 29.38 23.18 8.36 22.62 18.78
3.64 28.69 23.21 7.01 22.05 18.50
3.67 27.40 22.39 4.71 22.07 18.44
4.33 26.04 20.91 3.19 22.78 18.26
4.68 25.80 20.70 2.62 23.34 18.61
6.97 24.16 20.28 0.96 23.65 18.75


0.01 23.64 19.75
-0.39 23.87 20.51
1.95 24.28 21.62
2.59 24.89 22.40
4.41 26.76 24.47
5.87 27.25 24.69
1.45 27.58 25.67
1.11 26.89 25.59
0.36 27.17 26.66
1.97 26.79 26.05
4.56 27.79 26.12
6.05 29.25 26.90


, Prices and targins in Steer Calves
Choice 900-1,100 lb. slaughter steers Good and Choice feeder steer calves, 11 month feeding 2/


Jan. t 28.06
Feb. 26.65
Mar. 5 26.98
Apr. a 25.87
May 1 26.04
June 1 27.46
July t 29.79
Aug. t 31.74
Sept. s 52.85
Oct. 1 33.13
Nov. S 33.70
Dec. 365.64


17.85
18.87
20.13
20.12
21.05
21.19
21.16
20.72
21.50
21.05
21.75
24.19


12.76 36.70 26.71 17.83 30.81 24.78 56.60
10.97 32.59 25.21 12.46 26.65 23.55 0.92
10.98 30.44 25.73 10.32 27.27 26.90 0.02
9.47 30.90 27.25 9.85 27.06 26.00 -1.19
9.54 33.08 28.26 11.89 27.12 26.06 -0.68
11.34 36.74 27.80 15.59 28.15 26.36 -0.29
14.14 38.88 28.44 18.16 27.63 23.88 -1.62
15.17 39.78 29.25 18.48 28.29 23.90 0.39
15.70 39.15 27.90 18.12 31.55 24.09 5.20
16.65 37.96 26.35 16.20 34.52 24.50 7.52
16.36 37.21 27.00 13.02 36.27 24.22 9.61
17.79 34.12 26.66 7.41 37.49 24.50 12.71


36.80 26.35
35.76 26.50
33.79 27.25
32.00 27.81
31.86 28.79
31.68 29.56
32.06 30.06
31.58 31.73
32.21 32.52
32.34 31.88
33.59 34.52
36.45 33.88


3 ..... Good 900-1,100 lb. slaughter steers, Good and Choice feeder steer calves, 8 months fe2dina; 2'


Jan. t 24.17
Feb. : 24.31
Mar. a 24.57
Apr. t 23.67
May 1 24.45
June 1 25.67
July s 27.40
Aug. 27.58
Sept. 1 28.48
Oct. 1 28.91
Nov. 1 28.87
Dee. t 30.13


17.85 7.77 31.15 26.71 10.10 26.10 24.78 -2.15
18.87 7.81 27.66 25.21 6.47 23.34 23.55 -4.46
20.13 8.45 27.07 25.73 5.92 24.47 26.90 -3.97
20.12 8.02 28.08 27.25 7.36 24.71 26.00 -4.54
21.05 7.88 30.78 28.25 9.48 25.16 26.06 -2.74
21.19 8.54 34.80 27.80 13.77 26.39 25.36 0.04
21.15 10.92 36.80 28.44 14.05 25.81 23.88 -1.19
20.72 10.24 36.50 29.25 11.31 26.29 23.90 -0.37
21.30 10.63 33.85 27.90 7.14 27.74 24.09 2.96
21.03 10.04 32.20 26.365 6.99 29.55 24.60 6.00
21.75 8.74 31.50 27.00 5.77 30.07 24.22 3.17
24.19 10.01 29.25 26.66 2.00 31.18 24.50 5.18


30.52 25.35
29.72 26.50
28.88 27.25
28.35 27.81
29.43 28.79
29.91 29.55
30.49 30.06
29.98 31.73
30.28 32.52
30.22 31.88
31.49 34.52
33.51 33.68


10.81
10.36
9.79
8.20
8.12
7.37
8.20
7.40
7.37
6.18
6.74
9.01


13.25
8.86
7.79
5.94
6.50
7.80
8.16
7.49
7.71
8.12
9.09
11.10


I/ Prices of stookers and feeders for months of 1946 used i3 computing margins are not shown here.
/ For grades in effect prior to 1951. Grade names for slaughter steers are now approximately one level higher.
Compiled front Market News, Livestook Branch, Production and Marketing Administration.


4.46
4.36
5.00
4.45
5.34
5.41
6.27
5.48
4.93
3.72
4.24
5.70


L;43-47


- 21 -









PRICES AND FEEDING MARGINS
FOR STEERS
MONTHLY PRICES*


$ PER


40

20

0'
40

20

0
40

20

0


20


FEEDING MARGINSt


1947 1948 1949 1950 1951
*SLAUGHTER PRICES AT CHICAGO, 900-1,100 LB. EXCEPT 700-1,100 FOR MEDIUM. FEEDER PRICES
AT KANSAS CITY, 500-800 LB. EXCEPT 500-1,000 FOR MEDIUM
GRADE AS USED PRIOR TO 1951
t PRICE DIFFERENCE AT END OF 8-MONTH PERIOD FOR CHOICE, 6 MO. FOR GOOD, 4 MO. FOR MEDIUM


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NEG.47984-VX BUREAU OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS


U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


NEG.47984-VX BUREAU OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS









PRICES AND FEEDING MARGINS
FOR STEER CALVES
MONTHLY PRICES*


$ PER


40

30

20

10

0
40

30

20

10

0'

20

10


FEEDING MARGINSt


1947 1948 1949 1950 1951
*SLAUGHTER PRICES AT CHICAGO, 900-1100 LB.;GOOD-AND-CHOICE
FEEDER STEER CALVES PRICES AT KANSAS CITY
GRADE 45 USED PRIOR TO 1951
t PRICE DIFFERENCE AT END OF 11-MONTH PERIOD FOR CHOICE, 8-MONTH FOR GOOD


U.S. DEPARTMENT AGRICULTURE NEG. 47983-VX BUREAU OF AGRICtJLTURAL ECONOMICS


U. S. DEPARTMENT-01 AGRICULTURE


NEG.47983-VX BUREAU OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS





JANUARY 1951


- 24 -


Average 1947-50 margins in feeding steer calves were generally simi-
lar to those in feeding steers of the same grade (figure, page 23, and
table 8), My The variations in margins were greater, for each grade, in
feeding calves than steers. Just as the longer feeding of top than of lower
grade steers is a cause for their greater variability of margins, in the
same way the longer feeding period for calves is the main reason why their
margins vary more than those in feeding steers. The longer feeding of calves
also contributed to their comparatively high average margins in the years
studied. When prices trend higher as-they did during most of 1947-50, there
are added gains for holding cattle greater lengths of time. As an average
for many years, margins for calf feeding might not compare quite as favorably
with those for steers as they did the last four years.

Although no examination of costs of gain will be made here, it is
worth noting that calves usually require less feed per 100 pounds of gain
than do steers. Also, feeding either calves or steers to top finish requires
more feed relative to gain than does feeding to lower slaughter grade. Thus
at least a part of the differences in average margins between top and lower
grades is offset by differences in costs.

Seasonality in Feeding Margins

As an average for the four years 1947-50, price margins in feeding
steers or steer calves were largest for the Choice grades when the fed cattle
were sold in the fall or early winter; for Good grade, when sales were made
in the summer or early fall; and for Medium grade, when sales were made in
the spring or early summer. Average margins by months varied most for the
Choice grade, and least for Good grade.

These comparisons are from data in table 7, which summarizes by
grades and months the more detailed data in table 6. Like all other data
and observations presented here, they apply to cattle fed the feeding period
specified and sold at a slaughter grade comparable to their original grade
as feeders.

Seasonal high points in cattle prices are determined by two main
tendencies that appear in nearly all years -- a spring demand for stockers
and feeders to go on grass that brings peak prices for not only stocker and
feeder cattle but also lower grades of slaughter cattle; and a demand for
slaughter cattle in late summer or early fall, when the total meat supply is
small, that results in seasonally high prices for Good and for Choice slaugh-
ter grades.

These normal trends are only partially revealed in data for 1947-50,
being partly obscured by gradual uptrends in prices and by short-term fluctu.
nations that would disappear in averages for a greater number of years. Yet
there was enough correspondence to normal trends that the seasonality in
margins during those years was fairly consistent with normal experiences.
(Textrb concluded on page 28.)
Y The slightly higher average margin for feeding Choice calves than Choice
steers, and smaller margin for Good calves than steers, largely arises from
use of a single price quotation for calves of both grades.








IUS-47


Table 7.- 1947-50 average prioe of slaughter steers and stockers and feeders
and lagged margin for feeding yearling steers and steer calves,
by grades, by months


I Aeraoesa for feeding yearling steers
I C.oi*e grade 1/ 1 .. rade 1 ../ I--i gWrade 1/
I Price per 100 pounds a margin, a Price per 100 pounds Margin, a Prie per 100 pounds Margin,
Sa price of a a price of t # I prise of
900-1,100 a 500-800 slaughter a 9006.1,00 s 500-800 a slaughter a 700-1,100 a 500-1,000 a slaughter
month a pound a pound steers a pound I pound a steers a pound a pound a steers
t slaughter a feeder I less a slaughter a feeder a less t slaughter a feeder a less
I steers, a steers, feeders a steers, a steers, a feeders a steers, a steers, a feeders
I Chioago a Kansas City 8 oanthse Chicago a Kansas City a 6 months a Chicago ia Kanas City a 4 month*
Earlier a a a earlier s I a earlier
SDollars Doilars olars Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars

Jan. a 33.09 23.92 9,51 27.98 21.42 6.79 22.69 18.567 4.64
Peb. a 30.41 23.58 6.91 26.26 21.35 6.18 22.09 18.43 4.44
Mar. a 29.62 25.12 6.43 26.25 22.98 6.19 22.95 20.12 6.19
Apr. a 28.96 25.45 56.64 26.20 23.16 6.56 23.18 20.49 4.84
ay a 29.52 26.71 6.20 27.46 24.47 6.72 24.74 21.68 6.17
June a 31.01 26.76 7.869 29.19 24.653 7.90 25.84 21.42 7.41
July a 32.09 26.56 8.90 29.88 24.47 8.46 26.49 21.30 6.37
Aug. S 32.86 26.70 9.20 29.84 24.46 8.48 24.62 21.16 4.04
Sept. S 33.94 26.72 10.02 30.09 24.31 7.11 24.44 21.06 2.86
Oct. r 34.48 26.38 10.90 30.22 23.62 7.06 24.31 20.34 2.90
Wove a 35.19 26.69 10.07 30.48 24.16 6.01 24.77 20.88 3.47
Dec. a 56.92 27.16 10.48 31.02 24.70 6.48 26.06 21.50 3.91

Averages for feeding U teer calves
SChoie grade a Good grade
a Price per 100 pounds a Margin, a Prie per 100 pounds a Margin,
Sa price of a a a price of
900-1,100 a Good and a slaughter a 900-1,100 a Good and a slaughter
pound a Chole* steers I pound a Choice a steers
slaughter a feeder a less a slaughter a feeder s less
S steers, a steer Oalves, a feeders I steers, a steer calves, a feeders
a Chioago a Kansas City 11 onthse Chioago a Kansas City a 8 months
f I earlier I I I earlier
Dolla',rs Dollar.rs Dolare soilars o M r.l.rs Dollars.

Jan. a 33.09 23.67 12.356 27.98 235.67 6.04
Feb. a 30.41 23.653 8.30 26,26 23.653 3564
Mar. a 29.62 25.00 7.28 26.26 26500 3.86
Apr. a 28,96 25.50 6.02 26.20 25.30 3.82
May a 29.62 26.04 6.81 27.46 26.04 4.99
June a 31.01 256.98 8.61 29.19 25.98 6.94
July a 32,09 25.88 9.71 29.88 26.88 7.651
Aug. a 52.85 26.40 10.38 29.84 26.40 6.66
Sept. a 33.94 26.45 11.68 30.09 26.46 6.41
Oct. a 34.48 26.94 12.12 30.22 25.94 6.69
Nov. a 35,19 26.87 12.02 30.48 26.87 6.48
Dee. a 35.92 27.51 12.25 31.02 27.31 6.72

y For grades In effect prior to 1951. Grade names for slaughter steers are now approximately one level higher.
Computed from table 6.




Table 8.- Average price margins in feeding steers and steer oalves
of various grades. and range and average variation in margin,
for monthly data, 1947-50 l/


Feeding yearling steers a Feeding steer calves
a Choloe a Good a Medium a Good and a Good and
feeder : feeder a feeder a Choice a Choice
steers I steers a steers a feeder steer a feeder steer
Item a fed : fed : fed a calves a calves
a 8 months : 6 months a 4 months a fed 11 months a fed 8 months
a to Choice : to Good a to Medium a to Choice a to Good
a slaughter I slaughter a slaughter a slaughter : slaughter
: steers 2/ : steers 2/ steers 2/ a steers 2/ s steers 2/
D dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars Dollars

Average margin, per 100 pounds ............... 8.49 6.74 4.59 9.80 6.56

Range in margin, per 100 pounds .............. -2.74 to 14.78 -3.75 to 12.61 -0.39 to 10.12 -1.62 to 18.48 -4.54 to 14.05

Average variation in margin, per 100 pounds /: 3.44 2.61 1.88 4.41 3.37


1 Data for prices of feeders which enter into margins begin in 1946. For weight classes of steers and original prices and margins,

see table 7.

For grades in effect prior to 1951. Grade names for laughter steers are now approximately one level higher.

S/ Average departure of monthly margins from the 48-mnth average aargin ahovn In first column. Computed from table 6.
Computed from table 7.


- 26 -








JANUARY 1951


Selected Price Statistics for Meat Animals 1/

: Jan.-Dec. 8 1950
Item Th1 : : : 1949 :
1949 : 1950 : Dec. N Hov. : Dec. :


Cattle and calves


Beef steers, slaughter :Dollars per:
Chicago, Choice and Prime ...............:100 pounds
Good ...o.............................: do.
Medium ..............................: do. :
Common .......................*****.**.******..: do. :
All grades ..*.........,...........: do. :
Omaha, all grades ......................3 do*
Sioux City, all grades ............ do. :
Cows, Chicago I
Good .......... .... ......o... o... : doe :
Common ..*..... ... o... ............. o. ... : do: :
Canner and Cutter ......................... t do. :
Vealers, Good and Choice, Chicago .....o.: do.
Stocker and feeder steers, Kansas City ....: do.
Price received by farmers :
Beef battle ............................ : do. :
Veal calves ......... ............ ...... .I do. :


Hogs
Barrows and gilts
Chicago
160-180 pounds ............... ......... :
180-200 pounds ........ ............... :
200-220 pounds .......&................
220-240 pounds ........................
240-270 pounds ....... .................:
270-300 pounds ........... ................
All weights *.. ............. **..*.......
Seven markets 4Y ........................ I
Sows, Chicago ....................*....... ..
Price received by farmers* .................
Hog-oorn price ratio 5/
Chicago, barrows and gilts ............:
Price received by farmers, all hogs ...:

Sheep and lambs I
Sheep :
Slaughter ewes, Good and Choice, Chicago
Price received by farmers .. ...............
Lembs :
Slaughter, Good and Choice, Chicago .....
Feeding, Good and Choice, Omaha .........
Price received by farmers .......*........

All meat animals
Index number price received by farmers :
(1910-14w100) ........................... :


I


28.65
26.07
23.17
19.77
25.80
24.23
24.41

18.79
2/15.41
1/14.38
27.64
21.34

19.80
22.70




19.50
19.88
19.94
19.77
19.41
18.87
18.62
18.60
16.67
18.10

14.2
15.7



10.83
9.29

25.45
6/23.06
22.40



311


32.43
29.68
26.08
22.86
29.35
27.88
27.98


37.77
29.91
24.50
19.23
26.47
24.17
25.11


33.10
31.24
28.15
23.90
31.41
30.06
30.47


21.85 17.30 22.88
19.03 2/14.16 20.46
16.48 5/13.22 17.82
31.08 27.72 32.50
26.67 21.44 28.46

23.12 19.00 25.00
26.27 22.00 28.20


18.91
19.46
19.59
19.51
19.25
18.84
18.39
18.42
17.72
18.22

12.4
13.7



12.67
11.33

27.30
./27.52
24.61



340


16.10
16.12
15.97
15.60
15.17
14.82
15.38
15.21
12.72
14.80


18.23
18.47
18.42
18.33
18.253
18.16
18.21
18.05
17.08
17.80


35.78
3R.98
29.61
25.24
55.05
31.52
31.61

22.98
20.88
18.42
52.68
29.45

25.40
28.90




19.09
19.52
19.30
19.17
18.95
18.71
18.88
18.81
16.77
17.70


11.9 11.5 11.2
13.1 13.0 12.2



11.20 15.47 16.24
9.20 13.20 13.70


21.91
22.88
21.00


29.41
29.22
26.70


280 357


31.37
30.77
27.40



360


Wholesale, Chicago :Dollars per:
Steer beef carcass, Good, 500-600 pounds :100 pounds : 42.66
Lamb carcass, Good, 30-40 pounds ........ do. : 49.64
Composite hog products, including lard
72.84 pounds fresh ..................... : Dollars : 20.96
Average per 100 pounds .............. a do. : 28.78
71.52 pounds fresh and poured .......... : do. : 24.61
Average per 100 pounds ..............: do. 3 54.51
Retail, United States average a Cents
Beef, Good grade ....................:per pound a 66.8
Lamb ............*...** ................ : do. : 67.4
Pork, including lard .................... do. : 41.1
Index number meat prices (BLS) :
Wholesale (1926=100) .................... : 221.8
Petail (1935-39.100) .................... : 229.3


47.09
0/52.29

20.54
28.20
23.83
533.41

73.5
69.6
40.6


45.02 50.32 53.30
44.40 52.64 52.85


16.88
23.17
20.36
28.55

68.6
64.0
35.9


19.68
27.02
23.18
32.50

76.4
71.2
41.2


236.6 206.5 240.5
241.9 220.0 247.7


21.35
29.28
24.64
34.55

78.8
73.6
41.6


251.9
252.6


fAnnual data for most series published in Statistical Appendix to this Situation, February 1950.
2/ Cutter and Common.
Average for prices of Cutter and Common, and of Canner (Low Cutter).
Chicago, St. Louis N. S. Y., Kansas City, Omaha, Sioux City, S. St. Joseph, and S. St. Paul.
Number bushels of corn equivalent in value to 100 pounds of live hogs.
SAverage of prices for five months, August, September, October, November and December.
Average of prices for January, February, March, August, September, October, November and December.
Prices of 45-50 pound lamb oaroass in February, March and April.


- 26 -


Meat










Selected marketing, slaughter and stocks statistics for meat animals and meats Y/


: Jan
Item Unit : 1949


Meat animal marketing
Index number (1935-39=100) ......... : 139

Stooker and feeder shipments to :
8 Corn Belt States :1,000
Cattle and calves .................:head 3,258
Sheep and lambs ...................: do. 2,518

Slaughter under Federal inspection :
Number slaughtered :
Cattle ............................: do. 13,222
Calves ...........................: do. : 6,449
Sheep and lambs ...................: do. : 12,136
Hogs ............. ............... : do. : 53,032
Percentage sows .................:Percent: 15
Average live weight per head :
Cattle .............................:Pounds : 976
Calves ............................: do. 209
Sheep and lambs ...................: do. : 94
Hogs ..............................: do. 248
Average production :
Beef, per head ...................: do. : 532
Veal, per head ....................: do. : 116
Lamb and mutton, per head .........: do. 44
Pork, per head Y/ ................: do. 139
Pork, per 100 pounds live weight 2/: do. : 56
Lard, per head ....................: do. : 36
Lard, per 100 pounds live weight : do. 15
-Total production'. Million:
Beef ........... ...... ........... :pounds : 6,998
Veal ............................ : do. 746
Lamb and mutton ...................: do. : 536
Pork .......................... : do. : 7,352
Lard ................... ........: do. : 1,923

Total commercial slaughter 3/ : :


Co


Number slaughtered


:1,000 :


Cattle ............................:head
Calves ........................... : do. :
Sheep and lambs ...................: do.
Hogs ... ........................: do.
Total production :Million:
Beef ............................. :. pounds :
Veal ..............................: do.
Lamb and mutton .................: do.
Pork 2/ ...........................: do. :
Lard .............................: do.

ld storage stocks first of month : :
Beef ........... ..................... : do.
Veal ................................: do.
Lamb and mutton ...................... : do. I
Pork .. .............................. : do. :
Total meat and meat products 4/ *....: do. t


18,013
10,828.
13,377
63,744

9,142
1,240
587
8,745
2,170



t---


-DeO ... .1. 1950 s 1961
1 1949 : a s
t 1950 t Deo. : Novo z Deo. Jan,
I ... ....... i I


142



3,140
2,915



13,103
5,850
11,739
56,964
15

989
206
96
244

541
115
46
137
56
35
14

7,051.
667
534
7,788
2,009



17,882
9,963
12,851
68,446

9,239
1,138
582
9,260
2,290


154



198
71



1,064
511
1,058
6,477
11

984
218
98
243

525
119
46
136
56
36
15

.556
60
49
881
232



1,428
838
1,152
7,600

717
97
53
1,023
260


165



483
238



1,151
505
969
6,144
9

998
214
95
237

534
117
45
134
56
33
14

611
58
43
821
201



1,555
843
1,058
7,246

793
98
47
966
227


91 95
12 9
11 8
297 220
493 405


160



251
252



1,110
445
918
6,777
9

1,017
200
97
245

546
109
46
137
56
36
15

603
48
42
924
242



1,481
744
990
7,951

774
82
45
1,076
269


545 791


Annual data for most series published in Statistical Appendix to this Situation, February 1950.
Excludes lard.
3 Federally inspected, and other wholesale and retail.
3Y Includes stocks of sausage and sausage room products, canned meats and canned meat products, and edible
offals, in addition to the four meats listed.


- 27 -


LMS-47




U. S. Department of Agricul*ure Penalty for private use to avoid
Washington 25, D. C. payment of postage $300

OFFICIAL BUSINESS UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
1111 l iII 11111 llllII II ili llill1 11111
BAE.LMS-47-1/51-6000 3 1262089010630
Permit No, 1001




1TY OF FLORIDA
LIBRARY
DCiUixENTS DEPr.
5-16-49
FNS-16 GAINESVILLE9 F
---- ----------- ---- --------- ---- ------ a a -
28 -

Wide feeding margins for Choice cattle sold in the fall or early
winter after an 8 or 11 month feeding period are a combined result of
feeder purchases made before the spring advance in their prices, and sales
made before the high price season for slaughter steers ends. The widest
feeding margins for Good grade cattle come somewhat earlier because a
shorter feeding period follows about the same low-price purchase dates.
Medium grade feeder steers fed only four months to Medium slaughter steers
bring their widest margin when purchases are made in the winter, at prices
not far above their seasonal low, and sales are timed for their seasonal
high in early summer. 4/

One caution in use of prices in tables 6 and 7 is that the low
February prices are the result of price breaks in that month of two years.
Averages for more than four years would show relatively higher prices for
February than those presented here.

/ This timing, though describing the widest margins, is not suggested as
always the best for feeders to follow. Feeders have to consider the man-
agement of their entire farm in deciding how best to fit in their cattle
operations. Furthermore, normal seasonal price relationships do not hold
true every year. Some feeders do best by carrying out the same feeding
plan year after year, but others do well by adjusting to the special oir-
oumstances of each year.




Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EYXB3556W_NW9QTU INGEST_TIME 2012-10-23T14:27:16Z PACKAGE AA00008526_00002
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES