• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Fig. 1
 Title Page
 Center information
 Table of Contents
 List of Tables
 List of Figures
 Acknowledgement
 Summary
 Introduction
 Objectives
 Procedure
 Findings
 Conclusion
 Reference
 Appendix






Group Title: Industry report - University of Florida, Florida Agricultural Market Research Center ; no. 87-1
Title: An economic analysis of veal production in North Florida
CITATION PDF VIEWER THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00026925/00001
 Material Information
Title: An economic analysis of veal production in North Florida a report
Series Title: Industry report Florida Agricultural Market Research Center
Alternate Title: Veal production in north Florida
Physical Description: x, 41 p. : ill., maps ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Degner, Robert L
Locascio, J. David, 1955-
Odegaard, W. M ( Wayne M )
Lafayette County Development Authority (Fla.)
Publisher: Florida Agricultural Market Research Center, a part of the Food and Resource Economics Dept., Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville FL
Publication Date: 1987
 Subjects
Subject: Veal   ( lcsh )
Veal -- Marketing   ( lcsh )
Calves -- Marketing -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Bibliography: Bibliography: p. 31.
Statement of Responsibility: by R. L. Degner, J. D. Locascio and W. M. Odegaard.
General Note: "July 1987."
General Note: "A research project conducted for the Lafayette County Development Authority."
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00026925
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: aleph - 000989128
oclc - 17856120
notis - AEW5986

Downloads
Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover
    Fig. 1
        Fig. 1
    Title Page
        Page i
    Center information
        Page ii
    Table of Contents
        Page iii
        Page iv
    List of Tables
        Page v
        Page vi
    List of Figures
        Page vii
    Acknowledgement
        Page viii
    Summary
        Page ix
        Page x
    Introduction
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Objectives
        Page 3
    Procedure
        Page 3
    Findings
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
    Conclusion
        Page 29
        Page 30
    Reference
        Page 31
    Appendix
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
Full Text











AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
OF VEAL PRODUCTION
IN NORTH FLORIDA




Industry Report 87-1



a report by
R. L. Degner, J. D. Locascio and W. M. Odegaard


a research project conducted for the
Lafayette County Development Authority



July 1987



The Florida Agricultural Market Research Center
a part of
the Food and Resource Economics Department
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida 32611















Leon & Jefferson Cos.
3,400 ,


Hamilton, Columbia
& Baker Cos.
Suwannee Co. 4 3,600
2,100 /


Lafayette Co.
9,500


Alachua, Levy,
Gilchrist & Dixie Cos.
7,400


Figure 1.--Dairy cow population, north Florida study region, January 1,
1987.
























AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF VEAL PRODUCTION IN NORTH FLORIDA


A Report by

R. L. Degner, J. D. Locascio and W. M. Odegaard






A research project conducted for the

Lafayette County Development Authority






July 1987






The Florida Agricultural Market Research Center
a part of
the Food and Resource Economics Department
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611












The Florida Agricultural Market Research Center

A Service of
the Food and Resource Economics Department
of the
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences


The purpose of this Center is to provide timely, applied research on

current and emerging marketing problems affecting Florida's agricultural

and marine industries. The Center seeks to provide research and infor-

mation to production, marketing and processing firms, and groups and

organizations concerned with improving and expanding markets for Florida

agricultural and marine products.

The Center is staffed by a basic group of economists trained in

agriculture and marketing. In addition, cooperating personnel from other

IFAS units provide a wide range of expertise which can be applied as

determined by the requirements of individual projects.












TABLE OF CONTENTS


Page

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . v

LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES . . . .. . vi

LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . viii

SUMMARY ... ............ .. ............. .. ix

INTRODUCTION . . . . .. . . 1

OBJECTIVES . . . . . . 3

PROCEDURE . . . . ... . . 3

FINDINGS . . . . ... . . 4

Trends in U.S. Veal Supplies, Prices and Consumption . 4

Potential Supply of Veal Calves in North Florida . 8

General Production Practices . . . .. 11

The Veal Barn and Equipment . . . .. 13

The barn . . . . . 13

Crates . . . . . 15

Feeding equipment . . . . 16

Watering system . . . . 17

Miscellaneous equipment . . . 17

Other facilities . . . . 17

Specific Production Practices . . .. 18

Selection of calves . . . .. 18

Feeding . . . . .. .. 19

Labor requirements . . . ... .20















TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED


Page


Medical considerations, mortality,
rates . . .


Other considerations . .


Marketing . . . .


Markets . . . .


Grades . . . .


Prices . . . .


Estimated Costs and Returns . .


Summary of assumptions . .


CONCLUSIONS . . . . .


REFERENCES . . . . .


APPENDIX . . . .


and culling
. . o


. . .


.


. .



. .. ...










. . .












LIST OF TARBES


Table Page

1 Veal production practices . . . ... 12

2 North Florida veal production budget . . .. 26

3 Annual net returns to management for a 108-head veal
barn at selected price levels, mortality, and cull
rates . . . . . . 28

4 Annual net returns at selected calf costs and feed
conversion ratios . . . . ... ... 28














LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES


Table

1 Veal supplies and prices . . . .

2 Annual imports and exports of veal, United States,
1975-1985 . . . . .

3 Per capital consumption of veal, carcass and retail
cut equivalent, 1965-1985 . . . .

4 Number of dairy cows in study region. 1985-1987 .

5 Monthly supplies of veal calves . . .

6 Veal barn and equipment list . . .

7 Federally inspected livestock plants in the south-
eastern United States . . . .


Page

. 33



. 37



. 38

. 39

. 39

. 40



. 41












LIST OF FIGURES


Figure Page

1 Dairy cow population, north Florida study region,
January 1, 1987 . . . . ... . 2

2 U.S. veal supplies and net imports . . . 5

3 Farm and retail prices for veal . . . 6

4 U.S. per capital consumption of veal, retail cut
equivalent, 1965-1985 . . . . 7

5 Seasonality of calving and estimated monthly bull
calf numbers, 11-county north Florida region . .. 10

6 Plans for a 108-head veal barn . . ... 14












ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


Our sincere appreciation is expressed to members of the Lafayette

County Development Authority for their interest in the agricultural

economy of Lafayette County and north Florida. We are grateful for their

financial support of this project. We are also grateful to Dr. Fred

Leak, Extension Meats Specialist, University of Florida, for his thorough

review of the manuscript. We are also indebted to Mr. Gene Hayes and Mr.

Ben Langford of Gold Kist for their assistance, and to Dr. Lane Ely of

the Extension Dairy Science Department of the University of Georgia for

his help with the production budgets. Thanks also go to Renelle Kiddy

for typing this manuscript.


viii












SUMMARY


* This study examines the potential profitability of fancy, milk-fed veal
production in north Florida.

* Lafayette County lies in the center of an 11-county dairying region.
In January 1987, Lhe region had 26,000 milk cows, 16 percent more than
January 1985. The number of dairy cows in Lafayette County rose from
6,800 to 9,500 during this same period, an increase of 40 percent.

* The region produces enough bull calves to stock an estimated 12 to 15
veal barns (108 head) on a full-time, annual basis. Given a typical
16-week feeding cycle, most producers feed three batches ("turns") per
year.

* Large, 85- to 100-pound calves, three to five days of age, are pre-
ferred for veal production. Veal producers in other areas generally
discriminate against Florida calves because of their considerably
lighter weight and lack of vigor. Improving the quality of Florida
calves would enhance veal feeding opportunities in the region and
increase returns to dairymen.

* A typical veal barn is 28' x 126' and has a capacity of 108 head.
Mortality and culling usually result in 100 marketable calves. The
cost of a 108-head capacity barn and all equipment is about $38,000.

* The calves are confined in individual crates where they are fed a
specially formulated milk replacer diet.

* Calves are fed to 350 to 380 pounds. The meat of fancy veal carcasses
must be grayish-pink, very smooth and velvety in texture. Dark, red-
tinged, "off-grade" carcasses bring reduced prices.

* The meat is kept light in color by severely restricting the calves'
iron intake. This practice makes calves more susceptible to health
problems. Good management is critical to keep health problems under
control, to achieve efficient production, and to effectively market
finished calves.

* Developing markets for Florida fed veal may prove difficult because no
processing plants are near the study region. Long-distance hauling
results in increased mortality. Growers will have to develop contacts
with honest, reputable buyers.

* Cash costs, which include calves, feed, veterinary bills, medicine,
utilities, repairs, supplies, labor, transportation of calves to
market, insurance, and interest amount to approximately $33,000 per
barn of calves, nearly $100,000 per year.












SNet returns, after deducting cash costs, were about $12,600 per year.
After deducting debt payment on the barn and equipment, net returns to
management are approximately $6,900 per year.

SConversion of existing farm buildings, such as poultry houses and hog
barns, and utilization of family labor could make financial returns
more attractive.

* The probability of success for veal feeders will be enhanced if several
veal barns are established in the region. Small, isolated growers with
limited production will have difficulty in both production and market-
ing.

* The delicate balance of health of veal calves makes dedication to the
operation essential. Veal feeding requires constant attention, but it
has the potential to provide the dedicated, skillful manager with
reasonably high rewards.












AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF VEAL PRODUCTION IN NORTH FLORIDA

by R. L. Degner, J. D. Locascio and W. M. Odegaard*


INTRODUCTION


The economy of north Florida is heavily dependent on agriculture

and, in recent years, low product prices for traditional crops, coupled

with high input costs, have resulted in depressed economic conditions.

There is a pressing need to identify new income alternatives, parti-

cularly those which are compatible with the agriculturally oriented

resources an skills found in the area. Veal production, as a by-product

of the dairy industry, may offer a profitable alternative. As of January

1, 1987, there were 26,000 dairy cows in an 11-county region in north

Florida, bounded on the west by Leon County and on the south by Levy

County (Figure 1). Lafayette County, with 9,500 cows, is the dairying

center of north Florida and appears to be the area most likely to develop

veal production in north Florida. Presently, most of the dairy bull

calves produced in the region are slaughtered as bob veal or shipped to

out-of-state veal producers. The purpose of this study is to determine

the economic costs and returns of feeding these calves locally and

selling them as fancy fed veal.











*R. L. Degner is Professor and Director, and J. D. Locascio is a
Research Assistant in the Florida Agricultural Market Research Center,
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida.
W. M. Odegaard is County Agricultural Agent, Lafayette County Extension
Office.














Leon & Jefferson Cos.
3,400 %


Hamilton, Columbia
& Baker Cos.
Suwannee Co. 3,600
2,100 /


Lafayette Co.
9,500


Alachua, Levy,
Gilchrist & Dixie Cos.
7,400


Figure l.--Dairy cow population, north Florida study region, January 1,
1987.












ORJECTTVRS


The overall objective of this study was to determine the economic

feasibility of producing veal in north Florida. Specific objectives were

to:

(1) determine typical production practices of veal producers in

other areas of the United States, and typical production costs

and returns associated with veal feeding technology appropriate

to north Florida.

(2) assess the marketing opportunities for veal calves produced in

north Florida.


PROCEDURE


A computerized search of recent literature related to veal produc-

tion was conducted through the University of Florida library. Most of

the published material dates from the 1970's, although some work has been

completed more recently (see Reference section). Additionally, meat

scientists, dairy production specialists, agricultural economists and

agricultural engineers at the University of Florida and the University of

Georgia were contacted for information concerning veal production.

Finally, researchers visited a typical veal barn in north Georgia and

interviewed several Gold Kist employees familiar with veal production.

North Georgia was visited because it is the nearest area with a currently

active commercial veal industry.












ORJECTTVRS


The overall objective of this study was to determine the economic

feasibility of producing veal in north Florida. Specific objectives were

to:

(1) determine typical production practices of veal producers in

other areas of the United States, and typical production costs

and returns associated with veal feeding technology appropriate

to north Florida.

(2) assess the marketing opportunities for veal calves produced in

north Florida.


PROCEDURE


A computerized search of recent literature related to veal produc-

tion was conducted through the University of Florida library. Most of

the published material dates from the 1970's, although some work has been

completed more recently (see Reference section). Additionally, meat

scientists, dairy production specialists, agricultural economists and

agricultural engineers at the University of Florida and the University of

Georgia were contacted for information concerning veal production.

Finally, researchers visited a typical veal barn in north Georgia and

interviewed several Gold Kist employees familiar with veal production.

North Georgia was visited because it is the nearest area with a currently

active commercial veal industry.












FINDINGS


Trends in U.S. Veal Supplies, Prices, and Consumption


Annual veal supplies in the United States have varied considerably

since the early 1970's. Supplies declined from a high of 827 million

pounds, carcass weight, in 1975 to 379 million pounds in 1980. Since

1980, supplies have steadily increased to 499 million pounds in 1985

(Figure 2, Appendix Table 1). Veal imports remained fairly steady at

relatively low levels from 1975 to 1985. Veal exports are relatively

insignificant, ranging from approximately 2.2 million pounds in 1975 to

5.2 million pounds in 1984 (Appendix Table 2). Net imports were approxi-

mately 22.2 million pounds in 1975 and 16.4 million pounds in 1985

(Figure 2, Appendix Table 2).

Live weight farm veal prices have ranged from about 27 cents per

pound in 1975 to 89 cents per pound in 1979 (Figure 3, Appendix Table 1).

Since 1982, live weight farm prices have varied from 60 to 62 cents per

pound. Retail veal prices steadily increased from 1973 through 1980, but

they are not available for 1981 through 1985.

Per capital consumption of veal in the U.S. has declined from 4.3

pounds in 1965 to 1.5 in 1973 and 1980 (retail cut equivalent). Although

consumption has declined dramatically since 1965, it appears to have

stabilized at 1.6 to 1.8 pounds per capital in recent years (Figure 4).

R. L. Fox, in Veal Calf Production and Marketing in the Northeast,

identified nine major reasons for declining veal production and consump-

tion: (1) Ethnic groups historically consuming large amounts of veal are

being assimilated with other nationals and have changed their eating

habits; (2) Dairy cow numbers are declining; (3) The beef industry is















813
794


499
477 4 4

\10 415 423 428
S 379 -


32'
U.S. f


Net Imports


22.2 19.6 18.9 24.6 23.1 18.6 13.2 15.4 14.8 18.9 16.4
o--e-- -->- -^---e---e-- -


73 74 75 76 77 78


79 80 81 82 83 84 85
Year


Figure 2.--U.S. veal supplies and net imports.


900


8)0


700


600


400 -


300 -


200 -


100 -


. I I I I I












400


350

310

300 282



250

21
0 194
200 194
S200 182 1 181 180 o
S173
SRetail
150
pi


100 89
77
57 59 64 60 62 60 62
50 -1 Ir~ I I 1-
50 Farm 35 34 37
27 --


0
73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85
Year


Figure 3.--Farm and retail prices for veal.



















4.3



.8





3


3.4
33 3.2


1.8 1.8


1.6 1.6 1.6


U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85
Year

Figure 4.--U.S. per capital consumption of veal, retail cut equivalent, 1965-1985.


0 2-






1-


I












using many dairy calves to supply feedlots; (4) Returns from veal

production have been relatively low; (5) Veal production has tended to be

restrictive because it requires high-management skills to produce high-

quality meat; (6) More money has been spent in advertising beef than

veal; (7) The price of veal cuts at retail is beyond the budget of most

families; (8) Limited supplies, lack of availability and variable quality

has caused many meat outlets--hotel, restaurants, and institutions--to

turn to other kinds of meat products; and (9) Fewer chefs are knowledge-

able in proper preparation of veal (Fox, 1973). According to the

National Food Review, "Foods Not Eaten by Americans," 95 percent of the

surveyed population reported not eating veal at home, while only four

percent reported not eating red meats (Gallo, 1981). The percentage not

eating veal is probably overstated because much veal is consumed away

from home. It also appears that households which consume veal consume

relatively high levels.

In summary, the U.S. veal market has exhibited an overall trend of

decreasing supplies, increasing prices, and decreasing per capital

consumption. However, it appears that the market has stabilized in the

recent past.


Potential Supply of Veal Calves in North Florida


Over the past ten years, the dairy cow population in the 11-county

region has exhibited a steadily upward trend from 11,850 head in 1975 to

26,000 in 1987 (Dairy Summary, 1987). Preliminary cow inventory numbers

indicate that reductions in cow numbers due to the Dairy Termination

Program have been more than offset by expansion of dairies remaining in

business. Since 1985, the total number of dairy cows in the study












region has increased by 16 percent, while dairy cow numbers declined by

five percent nationally. During this period, the number in Lafayette

County has increased from 6,800 to 9,500 head, a 40 percent increase

(Appendix Table 4).

It is estimated that the 26,000 dairy cows in the north Florida

region will produce approximately 13,000 bull calves per year. However,

the supply of calves is not constant throughout the year. Maximum

potential supplies range from a low of 767 head during April to a high of

1,465 head during September (Figure 5, Appendix Table 5). During the

lowest calving period, March through June, approximately 3,160 calves are

produced. Given the typical 16-week feeding cycle and preferred three-

to five-day age spread for veal calves, this number of calves would be

sufficient to stock a maximum of 29 veal barns on a sustained annual

basis. However, it is very unlikely that this "perfect" distribution

scenario could occur because of geographic distribution of calves and

weekly variations in calving. Further, sales for bob veal, sales to veal

producers outside the north Florida region, mortality and culling would

likely reduce the number of calves available to north Florida veal

producers by an estimated 50 to 60 percent. Thus, the number of 108-head

barns that could be sustained on a full-time, annual basis would be about

12 to 15. However, the Jacksonville area also produces approximately

13,000 bull calves per year, and many of these could be utilized for veal

production in the Lafayette County region.

At present, approximately six veal calf buyers operate in the

region. They ship most of the calves to other areas, where they are

slaughtered for bob veal or raised as fancy fed veal. Some dairy calves

are also used within the region as feeder calves.

















1457 1465 1456


1218


1.7

1.6 -

1.5 -

1.4 -

1.3 -

1.2

1.1

1 -

0.9 -

0.8

0.7 -

0.6 -

0.5 -

0.4 -

0.3 -

0.2 -

0.1

0-


767 771


I I I I I I I I I I I
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Month

Seasonality of calving and estimated monthly bull calf numbers, 11-county north Florida region.


1148


Figure 5.--


1












General Production Practices


Considerable uniformity was found over the U.S. with respect to

production practices. Calves are put into small, individual stalls or

"crates" and tethered to restrict movement Lo preventI injury. This also

increases feeding efficiency and allows closer scrutiny of the progress

and health of individual calves. The crates are usually elevated off the

floor of the barn to accommodate cleaning. The calves are fed a liquid

milk-replacer ration, delivered to their individual crates in buckets or

through an automated delivery system. Virtually all veal operations in

Georgia use the lower cost bucket system; this is also the system

recommended for north Florida. Calves remain in their crates during the

entire 16-week feeding period.

Most veal feeders select Holstein baby calves that are three to five

days old, weighing 85 to 100 pounds (Table 1). Larger calves are

preferred, because experience has shown that they have less mortality and

generally perform better. Growers strive for uniform ages and weights to

minimize feeding problems and labor requirements.

Calves are usually fed from 14 to 17 weeks, with 16 to 17 weeks

being the most prevalent. Thus, most veal feeders can feed three barns

("turns") of calves per year. This feeding period results in calves

being sent to slaughter at 350 to 380 pounds. In recent years, the trend

has been toward heavier slaughter weights. The typical dressing percen-

tage is 70 percent, resulting in carcasses ranging from 245 to 265

pounds, hide-on. Buyers discriminate against carcasses under 200 pounds,

and prices of lightweight carcasses are substantially lower than heavier

carcasses.



























Table 1.--Veal production practices.


Industry Practices

Feed
Purchase Buying and Death Conversion Turnovers Slaughter Slaughter
Source, Year Weight Selling Costs Loss Ratio per Year Age Weight Dress-outa

(Pounds) (Dollars) (Percent) (Number) (Weeks) (Pounds) (Percent)

Pivoni, 1973 95 Buying 3.00 10 N.A. N.A. 14-17 325-375 N.A.

Fox, 1973 100 Buying 2.00 10 1.4-2.0 3.5 12-14 250-375 70

Stokes, 1974 102 Buying 2.04 5 1.2-2.1 3.9 7-15 228-342 67
Selling 2.33

Gold Kist News, 1984 80-90 N.A. N.A. 1.6-1.7 N.A. 16-17 350 N.A.

Gold Kist, 1987 85-90 Buying 2.00 7b 1.6-1.85 3.0 16-17 380 70

aHide-on.
bIncludes culling.












The meat of fancy veal carcasses must be extremely light in color, a

grayish-pink, very smooth and velvety in texture. Dark, red-tinged,

"off-grade" carcasses bring reduced prices. The meat is kept light in

color by severely restricting the calves' iron intake. This feeding

practice makes calves more susceptible to health problems; thus, growers

must be keenly attuned to the conditions of the calves to keep health

problems to a minimum.

In Georgia, mortality usually amounts to 3.5 percent, with a similar

number culled and sold as regular feeder calves. Thus, most veal barns

are constructed with slight overcapacity to allow for mortality and

culling. For example, many barns in Georgia are designed to accommodate

108 crates because mortality and culling usually results in a marketable

lot of approximately 100 head of fed veal calves.

The following sections provide greater detail with respect to

equipment requirements and feeding practices.


The Veal Barn and Equipment


The barn


A typical veal barn is 28 feet wide and 126 feet long, including a

20' x 28' feed mixing and storage room. Crates are placed in two

parallel rows, separated by an aisle approximately eight feet wide. The

floor is a concrete slab, with gutters at the rear of the crates to

facilitate waste removal (Figure 6). The slab is trowel-finished under

the crates and in the gutters for ease of cleaning, but the center aisle

is broom-finished for improved worker traction. A wide center aisle

prevents calves from interfering with workers.
























To Retention Pond




Feed Room

Wooden Crates< (108 Crates)

a 1 m lI i i rm
Drain
8" PVC Concrete Gutter-
Drain



4- 4' Ridge Vent Outside Dimensions: 136' x 28'
Galvalum Roofing, Scale: 1/16"= 1' (above)
.. 4" Fiberglass Insulation 1/8"= 1' (left)
Vire Screen and Poultry
/ Type Curtain
Rolled-up Forced
Curtain Air Heaters /


Figure 6.--Plans for a 108-head veal barn.












According to Georgia growers, a "galvalum" roof will reduce interior

temperatures 10 to 15 degrees, compared with a galvanized steel roof.

The roof is also insulated with 3.5-inch fiberglass. The walls of the

building, with the exception of the feed room, are open and covered with

chicken wire or screen. A canvas side curtain is rolled up or down for

desired ventilation or weather protection. Ventilation is further

enhanced by an air duct running the length of the feeding area. The duct

is approximately two feet in diameter and insures uniform air flow

throughout the feeding area. Gas heaters are suspended from the roof

near each end of the barn. The estimated cost of the barn, including

heating and ventilation systems, is approximately $8.75 per square foot,

for a total of slightly under $27,000 (Appendix Table 6).

Strict precautions must be taken to restrict the calves' intake of

iron. Iron sufficient to downgrade carcasses is readily available from

dirt floors, metal water pipes, crate nails, etc. Thus, preferred

construction materials are concrete, wood and plastic.


Crates


Crates are 22 inches wide and 44.5 inches long. The crates are

boarded on three sides, with a rope across the rear of the crate. Calves

are chained to the front of the crate so they cannot back out past the

rope. Crates receive very little wear except for the floor slats, which

are removable for easy repair or replacement. For ease of cleaning, the

crates are supported 12 to 18 inches above the slab on piers constructed

of four-inch diameter PVC pipe filled with concrete. Crates cost

approximately $35 each. For a 108-head capacity barn, the total cost

would be $3,780.












Feeding equipment


A 100-gallon, quick recovery, industrial water heater is required

because water must be heated to 165 degrees F. before mixing the milk

replacement powder. Heat is required to disperse the tat in the milk

replacement solution. Otherwise, the fat coats the calves' digestive

tract, decreasing feed efficiency and reducing weight gain.

Veal feeders usually use two feed mixers. A 55-gallon, factory-

built mixer is used when calves are small or when relatively small

quantities are needed. Most also use a large capacity mixer, which is

usually custom (shop) made from a used 300-gallon stainless steel bulk

milk storage tank. The tank is modified with an appropriate pump and

fittings. The cost of the smaller mixer is about $700, while the larger

mixer can be built for about $1,500 (Appendix Table 6). A hose is

attached to each of the mixers, and the teed solution is pumped through a

hose which is hand carried from crate to crate where each calf's bucket

is filled with the appropriate amount of feed.

Plastic buckets are used for feeding because they contain no iron

and they are cheaper than galvanized buckets. Heavy-duty plastic buckets

cost about $4.00 each. Each calf has its own feed bucket. The buckets

are placed on a retaining shelf on the outside of the crate during

feeding, and stored upside down on a pole above the calf while not in

use. Using individual buckets and storing them in this manner saves a

great deal of labor because the buckets are not moved in and out of the

feeding barn twice a day for cleaning. They are cleaned in the aisle and

allowed to drip dry while hanging upside down on the pole. Since each

calf has its own feeding bucket, many growers do not feel that careful

antisPptic cleaning is necessary.












Watering system


Many veal feeders do not provide water to calves. Calves' fluid

requirements are met through the ration of milk replacer. However, in

warmer climates, a simple watering system is necessary. One system

consists of a PVC pipe running along the front of the crates and placed

below the calf's head. Small holes are drilled in the pipe such that,

when the water is turned on, a tiny stream of water is directed in front

of each calf. This system has several advantages. First, there is no

spread of disease through watering since each calt receives water

uncontaminated by other calves. Second, there is no cleaning or filling

of water troughs, saving labor and cleaning supplies. Third, it is

easier to control the quantity of water each calf is supplied. Fourth,

at approximately $70, it's less expensive to make and install than trough

systems.


Miscellaneous equipment


Miscellaneous equipment usually includes a refrigerator, which is

used for storing medical supplies. A small capacity or a used refrigera-

tor costing about $200 will be sufficient for most operations. A work

sink, costing about $75, is also useful for washing hands and cleaning

mixer parts, buckets, and other equipment as required.


Other facilities


A dependable source of high quality water, especially water with low

iron content, is also required. It was assumed that a four-inch well

drilled to a depth of 80 feet would be adequate. This well, along with a

one-horsepower pump with a 35-gallon pressure tank and all fittings,












would cost approximately $1,500. If the water supply contains too much

iron, a water purifier which removes iron may be essential.

Another consideration is waste disposal. Flushing the wastes from

the barn is typically done several times per week. A retention pond or

"polishing" pond is required to handle and treat wastewater. It was

assumed that a quarter-acre pond could be constructed for about $2,000.


Specific Production Practices


Selection of calves


Virtually all calves selected for veal production are Holstein

males. Georgia growers say that knowing the calf's history and physical

condition is extremely important. Calves should have been fed colostrum

at birth for enhanced disease immunity. Inexpensive hematocrit and

colostrum tests may be administered before purchasing calves to determine

iron levels and whether or not a calf has received colostrum.

Calves are usually purchased at three to five days of age. There

are several physical characteristics which indicate how a calf will

perform. When purchasing calves, features that growers look for include

a navel cord that is beginning to dry up, a big frame and large knees, a

flat back, erect ears, and bright eyes. According to growers, a flat-

shouldered calf will be 20 pounds heavier at market time than a pointed-

shouldered calf. "Bug eyes" indicate that a calf will do poorly. It is

very important that all calves in a barn are of a uniform age (within

three to five days) to facilitate feeding schedules and lower labor

requirements.

Larger calves are preferred for veal production. In northern

states, veal calves are started at 95 to 100 pounds but, in southern












states, birth weights are considerably lighter. Tn north Georgia, most

calves used for veal range from 80 to 90 pounds, but some are even

smaller. Florida calves will probably average about 70 pounds.

In May 1987, Georgia veal producers were having to pay about $75

for calves, but the price usually fluctuates between $50 and $90 each.

An additional $3.00 per head "buying fee" is frequently paid to calf

dealers for finding calves, hauling, and placing them in the crate.


Feeding


Most veal producers are currently feeding for 16 weeks, and strive

for three "turns" per barn per year. Highest feed efficiency occurs

during weeks six to nine, but the greatest weight gain occurs during

weeks 10 through 16. Although slightly better gains can be achieved by

feeding calves three times per day, this usually increases the care-

taker's labor responsibilities to the point where other duties are

neglected. Thus, most operations feed calves once every 12 hours.

Calves are extremely sensitive to being fed at the same times every day.

According to veal producers, it is common to find two to three percent of

the calves experiencing health problems the day after missing a feeding

schedule by one hour.

Calves are taught to drink from individual buckets. The use of

individual buckets prevents the spread of diseases. Some feeders scrub

and disinfect the buckets after each use, but others simply rinse them.

One efficient method of feeding the calves is to locate a bulk mixing

tank so that the buckets can be filled at each crate with a hose.

A calf raised for 16 weeks should have an overall feed conversion

ratio of 1.6 to 1.85, resulting in total feed consumption of 448 to 518












pounds, assuming a 70-pound Florida calf fed to a slaughter weight of 350

pounds. A typical ration consists of 10 pounds of "quick start,"

followed by 90 pounds of "starter-grower," with the remaining ration

consisting of "finisher." The calves are allowed no more than 6,000

milligrams of iron, most of which is administered during the first seven

weeks.


Labor requirements


It usually takes four to five hours per day to feed 108 calves twice

(using individual buckets, a bulk feed mixer and pressure hose), attend

to medical needs, and clean up. However, some experienced caretakers can

do this job in three hours (one hour per feeding and one hour for

medication and cleaning). Growth rates are enhanced and mortality rates

reduced if calves are visited and observed between feedings. Problems

occur very quickly and usually require immediate attention.


Medical considerations, mortality, and culling rates


The typical veal calf's health is characterized by weakness, anemia,

and low resistance to disease and infection. Medical supplies must be on

hand or available on short notice. Calf mortality rates are highest

during the first three weeks. A combined mortality and cull rate of

seven percent is considered acceptable. However, it is not uncommon for

mortality levels to reach 20 to 30 percent if disease is not detected and

treated in time. For most financial analyses appearing in later sections

of this report, a mortality rate of 5.25 percent and a similar cull rate

was assumed. These slightly higher rates were used because of smaller












Florida calves and the lack of trained, experienced labor and veal

feeding expertise in the study region.


Other considerations


Calves should be kept calm at all times, with all disturbances held

to a minimum. The calves seem to do better if visited frequently by

their caretaker. Miscellaneous outside noises create much less tension

if a radio is left on low volume during the caretaker's absence. Low

lighting should be used at night so the attendant can check on the calves

without disturbing them. Barn floor cleaning should be done no more than

two to three times per week. More frequent cleaning increases barn

humidity and the potential for respiratory problems, particularly during

the winter.


Marketing


Markets


Veal consumption is highest for middle- and upper-income households

in the northeast and north central U.S. Per capital consumption of veal

in large urban cities along the east coast has been estimated to be 20

times higher than that of the rest of the country (Fox, 1973). According

to extension dairy specialists at the University of Georgia, the Eastern

Seaboard, Detroit and Chicago are the major veal markets. Because people

of these income levels and geographic origins are heavily represented

among Florida's rapidly growing population, it is generally thought that

Florida's veal market is growing. However, entry into the veal market is

frequently difficult. Great care must be taken in choosing fair,

reputable buyers. Growers frequently complain that buyers are overly












strict on grading, grade inconsistently, and sometimes delay payment.

Growers in Georgia have relied on Gold Kist employees to help them sell

their calves but, at times, selling them is difficult due to market

conditions. Growers in north Florida would probably have to develop

their own market contacts and sell their own calves.

In order for veal carcasses to be sold outside the state of origin,

calves must be slaughtered at a federally inspected processing plant.

At present, there are only two such plants in Florida, located in Bartow

and Wimauma. There are only eight such plants in the southeastern U.S.

(Appendix Table 7). On the other hand, veal calves need only be

slaughtered at a state-inspected facility to be sold in Florida, and

there are a number of plants within the state that may slaughter veal

calves on a custom, per-head basis. Slaughter charges in other south-

eastern states range from $10 to $18 per head. Additionally, growers

generally pay for transportation from the farm to the slaughter plant.

Inexperienced veal producers may find it difficult to market their

calves at acceptable prices because of the lack of an established

reputation for quality veal production. Marketing calves will also be

difficult if production is limited to a small number of barns producing

calves sporadically or infrequently.


Grades


The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has established

official grades for veal. They are "Prime," "Choice," "Good," "Standard"

and "Utility." However, most veal is not graded by USDA, but instead is

graded according to criteria established hy packers.












In practice, most meat packers have established a simplified system

that generally consists of three basic grades: "No. 1" veal, "regular"

or "No. 2," and "downgrade" or "red veal." The criteria for each

packinghouse may be slightly different; thus, these grades are known in

the trade as "house" or "plant" grades. Additionally, some companies

have trade names or brands, e.g. "Provimi" and "Plume De Veau," which are

used to convey certain quality criteria.

The top grade of veal, generally the No. 1 house grade, is usually

defined as having a characteristically veal lean color; that is,

grayish-pink, with a very smooth and velvety texture. Further, most No.

1 grades specify that carcasses must weigh 200 pounds or more. Growers

strive to have 85 percent of their production in the top grade.

Most No. 2 house grades are identical to the top grade with respect

to color, but this grade is for carcasses weighing less than 200 pounds.

Only about five percent of the production should be in this category.

The "downgrade" or red veal category includes carcasses with lean

that is tinged with red. About ten percent of the calves are usually

downgraded. The prevalence of house grades makes it imperative that

growers know the reputations of buyers.


Prices


Growers in north Georgia are usually paid for their calves on the

basis of hot carcass weight, that is, immediately after slaughter. The

typical dress-out is 70 percent, with the hide left on to protect the

carcass during transit to its final destination. After chilling for 24

hours, carcass shrinkage is approximately three percent. Thus, it is












important for growers to know whether they will be paid on the basis of

hot or chilled carcasses so they can negotiate prices accordingly.

Although U.S. Choice vealer prices are shown in Appendix Table 1,

these prices are not directly comparable to the prices that should be

expected for fancy fed veal in the southeastern states. The prices for

live choice vealers in Appendix Table 1 should be adjusted for dress-out

and slaughter charges to be more comparable.

Unfortunately, historical grower prices for veal calves are not

available in the recent months. However, prices for hot carcasses, hide-

on No. 1 veal carcasses have been about $1.60 per pound, up from about

$1.35 to $1.45 per pound for most of 1985 and 1986. The No. 2 and

downgrade carcasses are typically discounted $0.10 and $0.30 per pound,

respectively, although some packers may discount them even more. A price

range of $1.50 to $1.70 per pound for No. 1 veal carcasses was assumed

for the financial analyses appearing in a later section, along with $0.10

and $0.30 discounts for the No. 2 and downgrades.


Estimated Costs and Returns


A computer program which generates veal production budgets was

obtained from the dairy extension specialist at the University of

Georgia. Costs and production parameters were reviewed and modified to

reflect the probable situation in north Florida. Many of the costs,

returns, and other basic assumptions have been discussed in previous

sections, but they are summarized below.












Summary of assumptions


The basic production unit is a 108-head capacity barn, which

produces three groups of calves per year, for a total of 324 head.

Although calves in the study region are currently selling for only $25

each, a calf cost of $45 was used because it was assumed that competition

among veal feeders would drive up the price. A purchase fee of $3.00 was

also assumed. Calves are assumed to weigh 70 pounds when purchased, and

350 pounds when marketed at 16 weeks. The feed conversion ratio is 1.7,

resulting in teed consumption of 476 pounds. Feed costs $852 per ton,

which is a weighted average of current prices for "quick-start,"

"starter-grower," and "finisher" rations. Veterinary fees and medicine

total $10 per head. Utilities and repairs each amount to $4.00 per head.

Four hours of hired labor per day, at $4.75 per hour, are required.

Hauling to market costs an additional $3.00 per head, and a high pressure

washer is rented after each barn of calves to clean the barn, at a total

cost of $210. Property and liability insurance, for respective coverages

of $40,000 and $100,000, costs $684 per year. Interest on operating

capital was calculated at 12.5 percent, and is based upon one-third of

the annual total. Total annual cash costs are $99,127.28 (Table 2).

Receipts are based upon selling the calves at 350 pounds and a 70

percent dress-out, resulting in a 245-pound carcass. The mortality rate

and the cull rate are each assumed to be 5.25 percent. Annually. 17

head die and 17 are sold as culls for $35 each. Of the remaining 290

head, 85 percent grade out as No. 1 veal and are sold for $1.60 per

pound, five percent are No. 2's, sold for $1.50, and 10 percent are

downgrades, which bring $1.30 per pound. Total receipts are $111,780.93

(Table 2).












Table 2.--North Florida veal production budget.


Item Unit Number Price Grade-out Value


Cash Costs
Barn capacity
Group/year
Bob calves
Purchase fee
Feed (476 lbs./head)
Vet., medicine
Utilities
Repairs, supplies
Labor (4 hrs./day)
Hauling to market
Rental equipment,
cleaner
Property & liability
insurance
Interest on operat-
ing capital
Operating capital
Total cash costs

Receipts

Carcass weight
Death loss
Cull rate
Veal calves sold
Regular
Downgrade
Veal No. 1
Veal regular
Veal downgrade
Cull calves
Total receipts

Economic Summary
Returns over cash
costs
Less debt payment
Amount
Interest
Years
Returns to manage-
ment


head

head
head
tons
head
head
head

head


108
3
324
324
77
324
324
324
1,344
300

3


$ 45.00
3.00
852.00
10.00
4.00
4.00
4.75
3.00


$ 14,580.00
972.00
65,604.00
3,240.00
1,296.00
1,296.00
6,384.00
900.00


70.00


210.00

684.00


12.5
95,166


pounds
percent
percent
head
percent
percent
pounds
pounds
pounds
head


245
5.25
5.25
290
5
10
60,388
3,552
7,105
17


3,961.28
$ 99,127.28


1.60
1.50
1.30
35.00


$ 96,661.34
5,328.38
9,235.86
595.35
$111,780.93


$ 12,653.65
5,747.28


$38,065
14
20


$ 6,906.36


aInterest is based on 1/3 operating capital.


Source: Adapted from work by Dr. Lane Ely, University of Georgia.











The total investment in the barn and included equipment amounts to

$38,065. Land costs and real estate taxes are not included. The entire

investment is amortized over 20 years at an interest rate of 14 percent.

The resulting annual debt payment is $5,747.28 (Table 2). The annual

returns over cash costs are $12,653.65 but, after the debt payment, net

returns to management are $6,906.36 (Table 2).

In reality, the net return to management can be extremely variable,

as prices or production efficiency change. For example, if the price of

No. 1 carcasses drops to $1.50, with all other assumptions remaining

constant, the net result is an annual loss of $198. Conversely, if the

price rises to $1.70, net returns exceed $14,000 (Table 3). If the No. 1

veal price remains at $1.60 and all production parameters except for

mortality and culling remain constant, similar variability in net returns

occurs. For example, if combined mortality and culling is reduced to

only seven percent, net returns are slightly over $11,000. On the other

hand, if combined mortality and culling go to 16 percent, net returns are

only about $600.

Feed costs, feeding efficiency, and calf costs also have marked

effects on net returns. Again, holding price at $1.60 and all other

variables constant, reducing calf prices to $25 results in net returns of

over $13,600. However, if calf prices rise to $75, growers would lose

over $3,200 per year. Similarly, if feed conversion improves so that one

pound of gain is achieved with 1.6 pounds of feed, net returns are about

$10,450 per year. But, if the feed conversion ratio drops to 1.85, the

annual net return is only about $700 (Table 4).












Table 3.--Annual net returns to management for a 108-head veal barn at
selected price levels, mortality, and cull rates.


Mortality and culling rates


Pricea 7% 10.5% 13% 16%

(-----------Net Return, Dollars------------)

1.50 3,673 -198 -2,907 -6,055

1.55 7,365 3,354 546 -2,722

1.60 11,056 6,906 3,999 612

1.70 18,438 14,010 10,905 7,280

prices shown are for No. 1 veal, hot carcass weight. No. 2 and
downgrade carcasses are discounted by $0.10 and $0.30 cents, respec-
tively.

bThe seven and 10.5 percent rates are equally divided between
mortality and culling. The 13 percent rate is based upon seven percent
mortality and a six percent cull rate. The 16 percent rate also has a
six percent cull rate, but a 10 percent mortality rate.


Table 4.--Annual net returns at selected calf costs and feed conversion
ratios.


Calf Costs per head Net Returns Feed Conversion Ratio Net Returns

(------------Dollars-------------) (Ratio) (Dollars)

25 13,656 1.60 10,456

45 6,906 1.70 6,906

65 156 1.85 694

75 -3,218

aAll other variables are held constant at levels specified in the
"summary of assumptions."












CONCLISTONS


All of the price variation and production parameters described above

are from actual experiences. Thus, if the worst possible scenario

occurs, growers could lose substantial money. However, when all goes

well, returns are sizeable. The key to success is management. Good

managers will control mortality, have high feed conversion rates, and get

the top dollar for the calves they sell. Poor managers will not survive

long. It appears that returns to average management will be modest.

Prospective growers should examilne Lthe equipment costs and other

costs, particularly labor. Some may be able to convert unused poultry

houses, hog or cattle barns into veal barns. Some may already have

unused dairy barns and equipment that may be converted for veal use.

Also, family labor could eliminate the necessity for hiring labor that is

included as a cash cost. Reducing the total investment and labor costs

could make the financial returns much more attractive.

Success for veal feeders in north Florida will also be more likely

if a reasonable number of veal barns is established. A critical mass of

finished veal calves will be needed to develop and refine production

expertise in the area and to establish a reputation among buyers for

quality fed veal. Small, isolated growers with limited production will

have difficulty in both production and marketing.

Another critical element in the formula for success in north Florida

is calf quality. Currently, Florida calves are discriminated against

because of light birth weights and lack of post-natal care. A concerted

effort must be made to improve the quality of the calves if a veal

industry is to be established in north Florida. Even if a veal industry

never materializes, improvement in calf quality could improve returns to








30



dairymen by making their calves more desirable to veal feeders in other

parts of the country.

Finally, persons interested in pursuing veal production should also

arrange to visit an active, commercial veal producer to observe the

operation first-hand. The delicate balance of health of veal calves

makes dedication to the operation essential. Veal feeding requires

constant attention, but it has the potential to provide the dedicated,

skillful manager with reasonably high rewards.












REFERENCES


Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. Dairy Summary (various
issues), Florida Agricultural Statistics, Florida Crop and Livestock
Reporting Service, Orlando, Florida.

Fox, R. L., Veal Calf Production and Marketing in the Northeast, Farmer
Cooperative Service, United States Department of Agriculture,
Service Report Number 131, June 1973.

Gallo, E. Anthony and James R. Blaylock, "Foods Not Eaten by Americans,"
National Food Review, Summer 1981, pages 22-24.

Gold Kist, "Veal Pays Off for Commerce Patrons," Gold Kist News, Septem-
ber 1984, pages 22-23.

Patterson, Van G., Joachim G. Ellerick and George F. W. Haenlein,
Economics of Veal Production in Three Northeast States, Agricultural
Experiment Station, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, Number
409, March 1974.

Piwoni, Richard and Jim Kliebenstein, Marketing Strategies for Veal
Calves, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Wisconsin-
Extension, Number A3254, 1983.

United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service,
Commodity Economics Division, Livestock and Meat Situation (various
volumes), 1975-1980 and 1981-1986.

United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service,
Commodity Economics Division, Food Consumption, Prices and Expendi-
tures: 1985.

United States Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service,
U.S. Foreign Agricultural Trade Statistical Report (various
volumes), 1975-1985.











































APPENDIX













Appendix Table 1.--U.S. veal supplies and prices.


Commercial
Average
Year Slaughter Dress Weight


Production


Per Capita
Consumption


Prices
Choice Vealers
Retail South St. Paul


1,000 Head


685
489
475
600
2,249


614
585
762
1,026
2,987


1,068
1,137
1,449
1,555
5,209


1,370
1,195
1,349
1,436
5,350


Pounds


140
155
154
133
145


135
144
159
150
148


155
160
160
159
159


150
149
152
156
152


Million Percent
Pounds Inspecteda


68.8
64.5
57.5
66.3
64.6


71.1
67.9
62.0
61.0
64.5


59.6
57.1
58.6
61.1
59.2


66.0
69.7
70.7
70.5
69.2


Pounds


0.5
0.4
0.4
0.5
1.8


0.5
0.4
0.6
0.8
2.3


0.9
0.9
1.2
1.2
4.2


1.1
0.8
1.0
1.1
4.0


Cents/
Pound


169.4
181.0
186.8
189.5
181.7


197.3
193.9
194.4
1.90.7
194.1


183.4
182.1
182.1
177.0
181.1


173.8
174.3
174.9
170.1
173.3


Dollars/
----Hundred Weight----


63.00
63.43
67.68
62.21
64.08


63.17
54.38
43.96
37.02
49.63


38.68
42.18
37.56
43.33
40.44


50.84
44.01
38.62
47.24
45.18


53.63
58.00
62.87
53.53
56.60


52.33
42.50
33.47
26.13
35.20


24.40
28.37
26.67
28.30
27.20


33.13
38.23
34.00
21.63
34.10


Continued


Farm


1973
I
II
III
IV
Year
1974
I
II
III
IV
Year
1975
I
II
III
IV
Year
1976
I
II
III
IV
Year














Appendix Table 1.--U.S. veal supplies and prices continued.


Commercial Prices
Average Per Capita Choice Vealers
Year Slaughter Dress Weight Production Consumption Retail South St. Paul Farm


1,000 Head


1,438
1,304
1,380
1,395
5.517


1,251
1,006
966
947
4,170


807
631
676
710
2,824


660
570
646
712
2,588


Pounds


140
143
149
144
144


142
148
144
141
144


140
155
1A6
141
145


138
156
147
146
146


Million Percent
Pounds Inspecteda


77.1
71.7
69.8
70.6
72.3


74.7
73.8
73.4
73.9
74.0


78.8
76.5
77.8
77.0
77.6


81.3
76.4
76.8
77.9
78.1


Pounds


1.0
0.9
1.0
1.0
3.9


0.9
0.7
0.7
0.7
3.0


0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
2.0


0.4
0.4
0.4
0.5
1.7


Cents/
Pound


177.7
178.9
181.1
183.3
180.3


179.9
195.9
225.9
236.1
209.5


251.3
285.5
293.8
298.3
282.3


303.8
310.5
310.3
313.2
309.5


Dollars/
----Hundred Weight----


53.42
53.13
44.90
41.33
48.19


43.95
73.33
80.21
79.47
69.24


89.90
103.05
92.57
80.12
91.14


71.59
72.49
79.04
79.01
75.53


35.30
37.53
37.33
37.47
36.91


45.30
57.30
62.57
68.57
59.10


86.97
96.67
89.47
85.83
88.80


86.80
75.93
75.10
72.10
76.80


Continued


1977
I
II
III

Year
1978
IV
Year
1978

II
III
III
IV
Year
1979
I
II
III
IV
Year
1980
I
II
III
IV
Year














Appendix Table 1.--U.S. veal supplies and prices continued.


Commercial Prices
Average Per Capita Choice Vealers
Year Slaughter Dress Weight Production Consumption Retail South St. Paul Farm


Million Percent
Pounds Inspecteda


100
95
105
115
415


107
99
107
110
423


103
98
110
117
428


115
113
122
127
477


81.0
77.9
77.1
76.5
78.1


81.3
81.9
80.4
80.0
80.9


83.5
82.7
83.6
82.9
83.2


86.1
84.1
85.2
85.8
85.3


Pounds


0.5
0.4
0.5
0.6
2.0


0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
2.0


0.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
1.9


0.6
0.5
0.5
0.6
2.2


Cents/
Pound


314.5
b
b
b
b


b
b
b
b
b


b
b
b
b
b


b
b
b
b
b


Dolla
----Hundred


78.75
83.68
76.85
69.38
77.16


69.33
81.96
83.37
76.13
77.60


75.46
74.71
74.46
67.25
72.80


73.31
76.99
54.37
51.12
63.44


Lrs/
Weight----


69.93
67.30
61.90
58.70
64.00


59.30
62.80
60.53
58.47
60.21


65.77
65.20
57.93
58.97
61.76


62.83
61.03
58.07
59.03
60.17

Continued


1981
I
II
III
IV
Year
1982
I
II
III
IV
Year
1983
I
II
III
IV
Year
1984
I
II
III
IV
Year


1,000 Head


687
594
715
802
2,798


770
675
770
806
3,021


734
669
805
868
3,076


817
745
856
874
3,293


Pounds


146
160
147
143
148


139
147
139
136
140


140
146
137
135
139


141
152
143
145
145














Appendix Table 1.--U.S. veal supplies and prices continued.


Commercial Prices
Average Per Capita Choice Vealers
Year Slaughter Dress Weight Production Consumption Retail South St. Paul Farm

Million Percent Cents/ Dollars/
1,000 Head Pounds Pounds Inspected Pounds Pound ----Hundred Weight----

1985
I 820 145 119 89.1 0.6 b 58.05 65.13
II 770 156 120 88.3 0.5 b 61.15 64.53
III 872 144 126 88.9 0.5 b 60.23 59.90
IV 923 145 134 88.8 0.6 b 53.65 60.47
Year 3,385 148 499 88.8 2.2 b 58.19 62.41
1986c
I 873 148 132 87.9 0.6 b 50.83 61.83
II 836 154 129 89.1 0.6 b 57.31 58.33

aFederally inspected.

bNot available.

CPreliminary.


Source: Livestock and Meat Situation, various volumes, 1975-1980 and 1981-1986.












Appendix Table 2.--Annual imports and exports of veal, Ilnited States,
1975-1985.


Imports Exports

Year Quantity Value Quantity Value Neta

1,000 Pounds Cents/Pound 1,000 Pounds Cents/Pound 1,000 Pounds

1975 24,361 54 2,208 120 22,153

1976 22,029 64 2,462 131 19,567

1977 23,896 69 5,029 93 18,867

1978 24,631 81 0 0 24,631

1979 26,500 128 3,428 115 23,072

1980 21,455 133 2,903 128 18,552

1981 17,961 111 4,810 122 13,151

1982 18,759 102 3,397 122 15,362

1983 18,539 103 3,697 133 14,842

1984 24,099 115 5,157 126 18,942

1985 19,698 102 3,303 118 16,395

aThe net quantity reflects the difference between imports and
exports.

Source: U.S. Foreign Agricultural Trade Statistical Report,
Calendar Year, various volumes, 1975-1985.












Appendix Table 3.--Per capital consumption of veal, carcass and retail cut
equivalent, 1965-1985.



b Retail Cut
Year Carcass Weight Equivalent


---------------Pounds---------------

1965 5.2 4.3
1966 4.6 3.8
1967 3.8 3.2
1968 3.6 3.0
1969 3.3 2.7
1970 2.9 2.4
1971 2.7 2.2
1972 2.2 1.9
1973 1.8 1.5
1974 2.3 1.9
1975 4.1 3.4
1976 4.0 3.3
1977 3.8 3.2
1978 2.9 2.4
1979 2.0 1.7
1980 1.8 1.5
1981 1.9 1.6
1982 2.0 1.6
1983 2.0 1.6
1984 2.1 1.8
1985 2.2 1.8

a
Skeletal meats--includes processed meats on a fresh basis.

bApproximately at wholesale level of distribution.

Source: Food Consumption, Prices and Expenditures: 1985.












Appendix Table 4.--Number of dairy cows in study region, 1985-1987.


Change,
Counties 1985 1987a 1985-1987


(----Number-----) (Percent)

Leon and Jefferson 4,400 3,400 -23
Suwannee 2,450 2,100 -14
Hamilton, Columbia and Baker 2,050 3,600 +76
Lafayette 6,800 9,500 +40
Alachua, Levy, Gilchrist and Dixie 6,800 7,400 +9

Total 22,500 26,000 +16

preliminary.

Source: Florida Agricultural Statistics Service.


Appendix Table 5.--Monthly supplies of veal calves.


Maximum Veal
Month Cows Freshening Calves Availablea


(Percent) (Number)

January 9.37 1,218
February 7.27 945
March 6.26 814
April 5.90 767
May 5.93 771
June 6.21 807
July 8.40 1,092
August 11.21 1,457
September 11.26 1,465
October 11.20 1,456
November 8.15 1,060
December 8.83 1,148

Total 100.00b 13,000

aIncludes only bull calves in the 11-county region.

Percentages do not sum to 100 due to rounding. Data were obtained
from the Dairy Science Department, University of Florida.












Appendix Table 6.--Veal barn and equipment list.


Item


(--Dollars---)

26,810

3,780

1,050

75

200

700


108' x 28' barn, 3,064 ft.2 @ $8.75

Crates, 108 @ $35

100-gallon industrial water heater

2' x 4' fiberglass sink

Used refrigerator

Feed mixer, 55 gallon

Shop-made bulk feed mixer:

Bulk storage tank, used 300-gallon

Electric motor

Suction shaft

Fittings and hose

Pump

Labor

Subtotal

Plastic buckets, 108

Watering system

Well

Polishing pond

Total


Cost


450

100

100

250

200

350


1,/150

430

70

1,500

2,000

38,065


















Appendix Table 7.--Federally inspected livestock plants in the southeastern United States.


Name Street City State Zip


Quality House Provisions, Inc. Rt. 17, Box 427 Bartow FL 33830

Florida Veal Processors, Inc. P.O. Box 1669 Wimauma FL 33598

North Georgia Processing Rt. 1 Baldwin GA 30511

Forrest County Packing Company P.O. Box 940 Petal MS 39445

James E. Bringle, Inc. Rt. 1 Salisbury NC 38144

Tennessee Packers & Processors Box 102 Englewood TN 37329

Lawson Packing Company P.O. Box 1580 Morriston TN 37814

Sparta Packing Plant, Inc. Rt. 10, L.D. Stone Rd. Sparta TN 38533


Source: USDA, Food Safety and
Procedure Division.


Inspection Services, Slaughter Inspection Standards and




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs