Citation
An economic analysis of the effect of increasing transportation costs on Florida's cattle feeding industry

Material Information

Title:
An economic analysis of the effect of increasing transportation costs on Florida's cattle feeding industry
Series Title:
Staff paper
Creator:
Stegelin, Forrest E ( Forrest Eugene ), 1947-
Simpson, James R
Place of Publication:
Gainesville
Publisher:
Food and Resource Economics Dept., Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
31 p. : ; 28 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Trucking -- Economic aspects -- Florida ( lcsh )
Feed industry -- Transportation -- Economic aspects -- Florida ( lcsh )
Flour industry -- Transportation -- Economic aspects -- Florida ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (p. 30-31).
General Note:
"August 1980."
General Note:
Some copies have Staff Paper 161r and corrections have been made to the tables in ink.
Statement of Responsibility:
F.E. Stegelin & J.R. Simpson.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not claim any copyright interest in this item. This item may be protected by copyright but is made available here under a claim of fair use (17 U.S.C. §107) for non-profit research and educational purposes. Users of this work have responsibility for determining copyright status prior to reusing, publishing or reproducing this item for purposes other than what is allowed by fair use or other copyright exemptions. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder. The Smathers Libraries would like to learn more about this item and invite individuals or organizations to contact Digital Services (UFDC@uflib.ufl.edu) with any additional information they can provide.
Resource Identifier:
22412548 ( oclc )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

















AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECT OF INCREASING
TRANSPORTATION COSTS ON FLORIDA'S
CATTLE FEEDING INDUSTRY


by

F.E. Stegelin & J.R. Simpson


Staff Paper 161


August 1980


Staff Papers are circulated without formal review
by the Food and Resource Economics Department.
Content is the sole responsibility of the author.








Food and Resource Economic Department
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida
Gainssville, Florida 32611







AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECT OF
INCREASING TRANSPORTATION COSTS ON FLORIDA'S CATTLE FEEDING INDUSTRY

F.E. Stegelin & J.R. Simpson

Rapid fuel price increases in 1979 and early 1980, along with con-
cern about further disproportionate rises, have led to speculation that
Florida, a major calf producing state and a net importer of finished
cattle and beef, will increasingly be competitive in finishing cattle to
slaughter weight. This hypothesis is strengthened by the recognition of
significant structural changes in the Florida cattle feeding industry
since the late 1960's as large-scale feedlots were developed and smaller
scale feeders declined in importance. In addition, there have been pro-
duction possibilities developments in Florida feedstuffs, such as the
use of bagassee silage and various other types of silage, high-moisture
corn, and improved corn yields. These feedstuff developments have renewed
the speculation of Florida increasing the number of cattle fed in Florida
feedlots. Considering these factors, this paper is an evaluation of the
potential effect increased transportation costs as a result of higher
fuel prices might have on Florida's competitive cattle feeding position.

PRESENT CATTLE SITUATION

Florida ranks sixteenth in the United States in total number of
cattle and calves. Beef cows and replacement heifers comprise approxi-
mately 60 percent of the state's cattle population. Beef cattle con-
tribute significantly to Florida's economy as evidenced by cash receipts
in 1979 of over $422 million from marketing 921,000 cattle and calves [5].
Total cattle population in Florida on January 1, 1979, numbered 2.2 mil-
lion head, of which 1.1 million were beef females that had calved (Table
1). Inventory numbers for 1967-1979 (Table 2) show the state's cattle
numbers have grown significantly despite fluctuations due to the cattle
cycle [12]. The estimated number of feeder cattle in Florida on July 1,
1979, was 818,000 head of which about 100,000 head were carried over
from the 1978 calf crop while the balance were born in 1979. (Table 3).
A summary of cattle outshipments, inshipments and net outshipments
(Table 4) shows inshipments of cattle are about one-third to one-half
the number of outshipped cattle. Even though one-half to two-thirds of










Table l.--Total cattle population in Florida, January 1, 1979, including
numbers of various classes


Class Number


--lHead--
Inventory
Females that have calved 1,338,000
Replacement heifers 225,000
Bulls 76,000
Steers 100,000
Calves under 500 lb 441,000
Total cattle population 2,180,000

Beef females
Cows that had calved 1,149,000
Replacement heifers 146,000
Beef breeding females 1,295,000

Dairy females
cows that had calved 189,000
Replacement heifers 38,000
Dairy breeding females 227,000











On hand January 1 Farm b/ Deaths
All cattle arktslau1 ahter cattle
and Calf Inship- aCattle and and
Year calves all cowsc/ crop ments Cattle Calves calves calves

---------------------------- ------1000 Head--- ----------------------------- -----

1971 2,060 1,220 1,025 115 361 657 6 46
1972 2,130 1,266 1,087 91 300 692 7 72
1973 2,237 1,336 1,180 100 289 626 9 103
1974 2,490 1,494 1,320 70 350 442 18 120
1975 2,950 1,670 1,250 69 6 52 562 15 120
1976 2,920 1,615 1,170 65 568 669 11 107
1977 2,800 1,579 1,135 65 662 852 11 125
1978 2,350 1,410 1,060 76 478 711 10 107
1979 2,180 1,338 1,060 76 298 623 3 92

Source: Florida Agricultural Statistics, Livestock, Sunmaries, 1971 and 1979

a/ Includes custom slaughter for use on farms where produced, but excludes inter-farm sales
within the state.

b/ Excludes custom slaughter for farmers at commercial establishments.
# ...- . .- -l _ .... .z._ .lt- t. .... .- ^. "t -









iaDie j.--tLstmatea number OT Teeaer cadtie in riuorua, duiv i, iI/


Livestock
category Number

---head---

Calves under 500 Ibs 718,000
Steers over 500 Ibs 72,000
Heifers over 500 Ibs 28,000
Total 818,000




Source: Florida Agricultural Statistics: Livestock Summary, 1979










Table 4.--Florida cattle outshipments, inshipments and net outshipments, 1969



In
as
Net pe
Year Outshipments Inshipments outshipments ou

--------------------------Head-------------------------

1969 407,240 173,458 233,782
70 469,545 166,143 303,402
71 604,215 199,322 404,893
72 655,467 224,384 431,083
73 591,728 239,299 352,429
74 411,947 214,414 197,533
75 510,248 215,752 294,496
76 573,095 236,897 336,198
77 612,815 221,948 390,867
78 672,671 243,256 429,415
tr-yf -%j Aj> n ~ -%rn f^ i^~








a 11 1 i u1 fu al e ae t: i aI lppu u uI riuriua allltuall auuuL Ca LIuaCr'Lt ui
a million are shipped back each year. Two-thirds of the inshipments are
for Florida slaughter while most of the outshipments are feeder cattle.
Florida calf outshipments and inshipments for 1969-1979 (as com-
pared to all cattle in Table 4) are given in Table 5. About one-half
million calves are shipped out of Florida each year with the number vary-
ing from 357,000 head in 1974 to 605,000 head in 1972. Calf inshipments
range from three to seven percent of outshipments. Calves account for
about 85-90 percent of all cattle shipped out of Florida, as depicted in
Tables 4 and 5. The number of outshipped stocker-feeder cattle of the
type going into Florida feedlots is, however, larger than the number of
calves reported in the time series data in Table 5 as there are a signifi-
cant number of cattle shipped from the Florida panhahdle. It was esti-
mated,for example, that outshipments of stocker-feeder cattle from all
Florida in 1978 numbered about 707,000 head, compared with inshipments
of 35,000 head (Table 6). In effect, the total net number of stocker-
.feeder cattle shipped out was about 672,000.
Approximately 75 percent of the calves shipped out of Florida in
1978 went to the cattle feeding areas in the southwestern and plains
states, which required trucking calves 1400 to 2200 miles. The southern
plains states of Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Kansas, and Colorado re-
ceived 58 percent of the calves, while 17 percent of the Florida calves
were trucked to the California-Arizona feeding area C5]. Calf shipments
to the nearby states of Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi also accounted
for 17 percent of the outshipments in 1978. Most of the latter were pro-
bably for backgrounding as a preparation for shipping to other feeding
areas.
Florida's number of cattle on feed, as of each January 1st, has
ranged from 55,000 head in 1974 to 81,000 head in 1976 (Table 7). There
were 5-10 thousand head more on feed in the late 1970's than the late
1960's. As of 1979, the 23 major cattle feeding states had about 12.7
million head on feed while the 39 states reporting cattle on feed had a
total of 13.3 million head on feed. Florida represented about one-half
of one percent of all cattle on feed with an inventory of 65,000 head.













Calf
Inshipments outshipments oL
as a as a percent as
Net percent of of all cattle
Year Outshipments Inshipments outshipments outshipments outshipnments a/ ci

-------------------Head-------------------- ------------------ Percent----------

1969 362,340 21,323 341,017 06 .89
70 435,897 17,437 418,460 04 93
71 557,087 16,783 540,304 03 92
72 605,140 20,377' 584,763 03 93
73 552,067 25,788 526,279 05 93
74 357,370 12,991 344,379 04 87
75 393,665 27,115 366,550 07 77
76 483,191 31,792 451,399 06 84
77 535.497 35.336 500.161 07 87











Table 6.--Number of stocker-feeder cattle and calves shipped out of Florida
to other states, and numbers shipped into Florida in 1978


Item


Number


Outshipments to other states
From south and east of Suwnnee
From north and west Florida
Total outshipments


Inshipments
To south
To north


from other states
and east of Suwannee
and west Florida


Total inshipments
Net shipped out-of-state


606,789
100,000
706,789


29,743
5,000
34,743
672,046


Source: Florida Agricultural Statistics, 1978, and estimates by
independent researchers.









Table 7.--Cattle and calves on feed, January 1, 1969-1979


Florida
as a
23 39 percent
Year Florida States States of 39 states

---------------1000 head-- ----------- --percent--

1969 60 11,965 12,534 0.48
70 61 12,644 13,190 0.46
71 57 12,209 12,770 0.45
72 57 13,330 13,876 0.41
73 58 13,861 14,432 0.40
74 55 13,067 13,642 0.40
75 60 6,619 10,167 0.59
76 81 12,327 12,943- 0.63
77 73 11,948 12,580 0.58
78 72 12,811 13,469 0.53
1979 65 12,631 13,275 0.49


Source: Livestock.and Meat Statistics, various issues.








STRUCTURE OF FLORIDA'S FEEDING INDUSTRY COMPARED WITH
OTHER AREAS OF THE UNITED STATES

The number of cattle feedlots in Florida is presented in Table 8,
and shows the decline in the number of Florida feedlots in the last 15
years. The results of a 1979 survey of Florilda feedlots show there likely
are five to ten feedlots with less than 1000 head one-time capacity, sev-
en or eight feedlots with 1000 to 4999 head capacity, three feedlots with
5000 to 9999 head capacity, and three feedlots with 10,000 head or more
capacity.
There were 125,000 to 130,000 head of cattle from Florida feedlots
marketed in 1979, as compared to the 150,000 head marketed each year in
the late 1960's (Table. 9), Although the number of feedlots in Florida
has substantially declined, the number of cattle fed in Florida has not
decreased as noticeably. The conclusion reached upon studying the market-
ings and structure of the United States and Florida feedlots is that the
Florida feedlots are relatively large by industry standards (Table 10) as
a result of a structural shift rather than growth in terms of cattle on
feed or feedlot marketing. Given this background, an analysis of the
impact from higher cattle and feed transportation costs on the Florida
cattle feeding industry is presented.
ESTIMATIONS OF THE IMPACT
FRDM WTnHFD TRANPPnRTATTnM CASTS










8, Number of Florida feedlots


Less than 1,000 to
1000 head 4,999 head

--------------------------

461
465
415
355

Estimated 5-10 7-8


lurce: 1965-68 from Beef Cattle Com
University of Florida, 1975,
results D33.


U


head
-e


ly ZL I4- uJ



000 head or
5,000 to
9,999 he

Number of L







3


imittee Repol
The 1979


io re
10,0
I and

s -------







3


, A.G.U.,
ta are f


I


Sub- To
total lo



16 4
13 4
15 4
13 3

-14 18-



ev


head
re


tal
ts



77
78











1979 compared with Nebraska, Texas and 23 major cattle feeding
states, 1978



State 1,000 8,00
or Less than to and
region 1,000 head 7,999 over Total

------------------------Head------------- ----------

Florida 3,200 23,700 101,500 123,400
Nebraska 1,630,000 1,255,000 1,285,000 1,170,000
Texas 80,000 312,000 4,523,000 4,915,000
23 states 8,542,000 4,242,000 13,861,000 26,645,000

-----------------------Percent---------------

nr1 10o 70 inn









the 23 major cattle feeding states, 1978.

e Less 1000 8000 head
than to and
on 1000 head 7999 head more

--------------------------NUMBER-----------------------

*ida 5 8 5

aska 13,500 337 42

s 959 58 103

states 125,523 1,487 415

------------------------PERCENT-----------------------

ida 28 44 28

aska 97 3 0

s 86 5 9

states 98 I I


ce: Livestock and Meat Statistics, Supplement for 1978 and survey data C[









F higher fuel costs on the transport of cattle. The method is not
?signed to replace spatial equilibrium techniques developed for use
ith computers; rather it is intended to complement such .approaches.
iis method is analogous to the use of partial budgeting rather than
)mplete enterprise budgeting to solve investment questions.
The method of analysis is presented in this paper is based on the
assumption that the Florida cattle feeding industry will expand signifi-
intly only if it is more profitable to feed cattle in Florida than in
other areas. There is no crucial evidence showing significant differences
between Florida's relatively large feedlots (by industry standards) and
ie other major cattle feeding areas, thereby permitting Florida's feed-
)ts to take advantage of substantial economies of size [14]. There is
cesss packing plant capacity in Florida and a review of inquiries by
)n-Florida packers indicates more plants would be built if there existed
supply of Florida fed cattle. As stated earlier, production breakthroughs
i the development of new feedstuffs has also occurred. Consequently the
;sue to be addressed becomes the cost-value relationship of trucking
little.
Part of transportation theory states that the higher a commodity's
ilue relative to its weight, the greater the distance it can be shipped
id remain competitive with locally produced commodities. There is no
isincentive to move cattle long distances if cattle prices are high and
uel, as a value of the animal, is relatively small. If the percentage
mains small over time, fuel costs are not a significant factor in en-
ouraging shifts in feedlot location from the southwest to the southeast,
id fuel costs are overshadowed by factors such as a competitive packing









Table 11. Components of consumer expenditures for farm foods

1972 1976 1977 1978 19791
---.----------BiH ion' Dollars----------- --------

Retail Expenditures 118.8 178.8 186.4 207.7 231.0
Farm Value 39.1 57.6 57.5 67.2 75.0
Marketing bill: 79.7 121.2 128.9 140.5 156.0
Labor/ 37.4 54.0 59.8 66.0 72.0
Packaging materials 10.2 15.0 16.2 17.5 19.0
Transportation, rail,
and trucks/ 6.1 9.5 10.0 10.8 12.5
Corporate Profits
before taxes 4.0 7.9 8.5 9.5 11.0
Other- 22.0 34.8 34.4 36.7 41.5


-4reliminary. -Includes wages and salaries,/ Also includes imputed earnings of
proprietors, partners, and family workers. "Does not include local hauling charges.
tfincludes business taxes, depreciation, rent, advertising, interest, energy, and
numerous other costs.









of Florida feeder calves are given in Table 12. The analysis is
done by quarters beginning with the first quarter of 1977, a period of
relatively low fuel prices and low cattle prices. At that time, the
.average price of Florida calves was $31.17 per cwt., and transportation
rates for pot trailers hauling feeder calves from Florida to Texas were
about $0.90 per loaded mile. Assuming a 1000 mile haul from central
Florida to a central Texas feedlot, the transportation cost attributed
to one animal was about $9, i.e., about 7.6 percent of the value of the
animal in early 1977. Diesel fuel was valued at $0.40 per gallon and
the fuel used on the trip was 9.22 percent of the transportation, or
0.70 percent of the value of the animal. In effect, fuel cost was rela-
tively small in comparison to other production and marketing costs since
fuel was only seven-tenths of one percent of the value of a 380-pound
feeder calf. The relatively small dollar expenditure for fuel also ex-
plains why Florida cattlemen occasionally purchase cattle in Texas for
feeding in Florida when, at the same time, similar type cattle are pur-
chased in Florida for feeding in Texas.
The price of cattle increased slightly during 1977 as did fuel costs
with the result that fuel consumed as a percent of the value of the
animal increased only slightly from 0.70 percent to 0.75 percent. In
1978, cattle prices,increased dramatically, with the average calf price
in Florida reaching $68.40 per cwt. by the fourth quarter. Fuel cost
went from $0.45 to $0.55 per gallon, but the end result was fuel as a
percent of the value of the animal declined and stabilized at about 0.45
percent for the last nine months of the year. Cattle prices continued
to increase in 1979 such that, even with upwardly spiraling diesel fuel
prices, fuel as a percent of the 380-pound calf reached a low of 0.34
percent in the second quarter. Cattle prices stabilized the first half
of 1980 with the result that fuel still only represented 0.60 percent
of the value of the calf in the first quarter 1980 when diesel fuel prices
rose dramatically to average $1.00 per gallon. A decline in calf prices
during the second quarter and a continued climb in diesel fuel prices
increased' the fuel/animal value ratio to reach 0.87 percent, a percent-
age that is not significantly higher than the 1977 figures.

FED CATTLE ANALYSIS

Data on analysis of fuel used for 1000-mile backhaul from Texas to












-- Estimations of fuel as a percent of the value of Florida feeder calves, 1977-1980 with project

UNITS 1977 1978
I II III IV I II III I
:e FL Calves 1/ $/cwt 31.17 34.60 32.50 31.90 45.40 59.17 64.70 68
. Rate/Truck2 $/mi. .8974 .8974 .8974 1.9353 .9353 .9824 .9824 1.
. Cost/Head/Mile
id,380 lb. avg.) $/hd/mi. .008974 .008974 .008974 .00953 009353 .009824 00984 .C
. Cost (1000 mi) $/head 8.974 8.974 8,974 9.353 9.353 9.824 9.824 1C
id (380 Ib.) $/head 118.446 131.48 123.50 121.22 172.52 224.86 245.86 25
. as % value
1 7.58 6.38r 7.27 7.72 5.42 4.37 4.00 4.









Table 12. --(Cont.)


1933
I- II


I II


Spring, 15~3
HC HF LC LF HC LF


Avg. Price FL Calves 1
Transport. Rate/Truck
Transport. Cost/Head/Mile
(1000 head,380 lb. avg.)
Transport. Cost (1000 mi)
Value/Head (380 Ib.)
Transport. as % value
of animal
Fuel Usage (loaded)
(19T)2/
Diesel Fuel Cost/
Fuel Cost/Load/Trip.
Fuel Cost/Animal
Fuel as % of value of
Animal
Fuel as % Transport. Cost


S$cwt 91.83 107.30 96.80 85.73 91.90 76.90
$/mi. 1.0807 1.0807 1.2896 1.2896 1.3455 1.3455


$/hd/mi
$/head
$/head


.010807
10.807
348.954


% 3.10


gal/
T-mile
$/gal
$/load
$/head


.01110
.60
126.54
1.2654


% .36
% 11.71


.010807
10.807
407.74

2.65


.01110
.65
137.035
1.3709


.012896
12.896
367.84

3.51


.0110
.75
158.175
1.5818


.012896
12.896
325.774

3.96


.01110
.85
179.265
1.7927


.34 .43 .55
12.69 12.27 13.90


.013455
13.455
349.22

3.85


.01120
1.00
212.8
2.128


.013455
13.455
292.22

4.60


.01120
1.20
255.36
2.5536


.61 .87
15.82 18.98


150 135 150 135
-,-,- 250 ----------------


.---..025
-------. 25
570 513

4.39 4.87


------.0113
4.00 3.00
858.8 644.1
8,588 6 441


E70 513

4.39 4.87


---------------
3.00 4.00
544.1 359.8
6.441 3.533


15.1 1.26 1.31 1 67
34.35 25.76 25.76 14.35


I/ Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service.

2/ Composite average of rates quoted by three Florida livestock trucking firms, and


Operations of


For-Hire Livestock Trucking Firms 1'7]1.


3/ Transportation Fuel Requirements in the Food and Fiber Systerm r18]

4/ Department of Transportation and Cost of Operating Trucks for Livestock Transportation [19].
5/ High cattle-high fuel; low cattle-low fuel.


ITEI1


UNITS


LC HF/


~ __I~








Florida as percent of the value pf a 1050-pound fed animal are given in
Table 13. The fuel/animal ratio was 0.60 percent in the first quarter
of 1977, declined to 0.51 percent in the second quarter of 1978, and
gradually increased to 1.09 percent in the second quarter of 1980. Al-
though the percentage doubled from two years earlier, the fuel cost is
a relatively small value of the animal.
Investment and direct operating costs for Florida feedlots (ex-
cluding feed and marketing costs) vary between $30 per head fed in 5,000
to 10,000 head capacity feedlots operating at 90 percent of capacity in
1979, and $125 per head in 500 head capacity feedlots operating at 60
percent of capacity [14]. The total cost of transporting a Florida calf
to Texas and backhauling a fed animal to Florida amounts to $34.46
($13.46 plus $21.00). Given the range on the direct costs attributed
to the various sizes and scales of operation and the finite transportation
charges, the relative importance of economics of size and management
efficiencies in explaining why cattle can be hauled long distances can
be observed. Another transportation cost factor is in the feed cost
relationships.

FEED ANALYSIS

An estimate of the importance of transportation cost in the total
cost of using corn-based rations is provided in Table 14. Despite mod-
erate fluctuations, corn prices in the first quarter 1980 were still
about the $2.35 per bushel price for Illinois corn reported in the first
quarter~1977. Transportation charges from Illinois to Florida have in-
creased from $0.35 per bushel to $0.53 per bushel over these three years.
Georgia corn is about $0.40 per bushel higher in delivered price than
Illinois corn. The net result is that in early 1977 corn delivered to
Florida feedlots cost $2.70 per bushel while three years later the
delivered price was just $2.90 per bushel.
Corn, on a dry matter basis,accounts for about 65 percent of all
Floridafeedlot ingredients used [13]. Given that about eight pounds of
feed on a dry matter basis are required per pound of gain, about five
pounds of corn are used for every pound of gain. Assuming that 350
nnmiit nf nain will hP nut on the animal in confinement feeding (aPart







percent of the value of fed (slaughter weight) cattle, 1977-1980 with projections to 1985


1977 1978

Units I II III IV I II II I IV


Avg. Price Omaha Ch. Fed Cattle -!
Transport. Frt. Rate (Backhaul) 2
Transport. Cost/Head/Mile
(40 head, 42,000 lb., 1000 ml)
Transport. Cost/I Way (1000 mi)
Value/Head (1050 Ib.)
Transport. as % value of animal
3/
Fuel Usage (Loaded) 3

Diesel Fuel Cost /
Fuel Cost/Trip
Fuel Cost/Animal
Fuel as %value of animal
Fuel as %Transport. Cost
Total Fuel cost Calf West &
Fed Cattle East
% value of animal


$/cwt. 37.88 40.77 40.47 42.42 45.77 55.06 53.75 54.76
$/cwt 1.65 1.65 1.65 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.80


$/hd/ml
$/head
$/head


gal/
T-mi le
$/gal
$/load
S/head


.017325
17.325
397.74
4.36

.01089
.40
95.832
2.3958
.60
13.83


.017325
17.325
428.085
4.04

.01089
.42
100.6236
2.51559
.59
14.52


.017325
17.325
424.935
4.08

.01089
.43
103.0194
2.575485
.61
14.87


.01785
17.85
445.41
4.01

.01089
.44
105.4152
2.63538
.59
14.76


.01785
17.85
480.585
3.71

.01130
.45
111.87
2.79675
.58
15.67


.01785
17.85
578.13
3.09

.01130
.47
116.842
2.92105
.51
16.36


.01785
17.85
564.375
3.16

.01130
.50
124.3
3.1075
.55
17.41


.0189
18.90
574.98
3.29

.01130
.55
136.73
3.41825
.59
18.09


$/head 3.2234 3.3846 3.4652 3.5458 3.7630 3.9302 4.181 4.5992
% .81 .79 .82 .80 .78 .68 .74 .80


Table 13 --Estimations of fuel as a











1979 1980


Item Units I II III IV I

Price Omaha Ch. Fed Cattle / $/cwt 65.42 72.51 65.88 66.86 66.85 6,
sport. Frt. Rate (Backhaul) 2/ $/cwt 1.80 1.80 1.90 1.90 1.90 2
sport. Cost/Head/Mile
40 head, 42,000 Ib., 1000 mi) $/hd/mi .0189 .0189 .01995 .01995 .01995 .
sport. Cost/I Way (1000 ml) $/head 18.9 18.9 19.95 19.95 19.95 .2
e/Head (1050 Ib.) $/head 686.91 761.355 691.74 702.03 701.925 6
sport. as % of value of animal Z 2.75 2.48 2.88 2.84 2.84 3
Usage (Loaded) 3/ gal/
T-mile .01110 .01110 .01110 .01110 .01120
el Fuel Cost'4/ $/gal .60 .65 .75 .85 1.00 I
Cost/Trip $/load 146.52 158.73 183.15 207.57 246.4 2
Cost/Animal $/head 3.663 3.96825 4.57875 5.18925 6.16 7
as % value of animal % .53 .52 .66 .74 .88 I
as % Transport. Cost z 19.38 21.00 22.95 26.01 30.88 3
I Fuel Cost Calf West &
ed Cattle East $/head 4.9284 5.3392 6.1606 6.9820 8.288 8
alue of animal z .72 .70 .89 .99 1.18 I




1/ Livestock and Meat Situation, various issues.

2/ Composite average of rates quoted by three Florida livestock trucking firms, and Operations of I

3/ Transportation Fuel Requirements in the Food and Fiber System, AER 444, and subsequent releases

4/ Department of Transportation data files, and Cost of Operating Trucks for Livestock Transportat

5/ High cattle-high fuel; low cattle-low fuel.






Table 4.--Estimations of fuel as a percent of the value of imported corn to Florida feedlots, 1977-1980 with projections to 1985



1977 1978 1979
CORN UNITS I II Ill IV I II III IV I II III IV
FOB Price (Illinois) Y $/bu 2.34 .233 1.70 1.84 2.06 2.27 2.05 2.03 2.17 2.37 2.55 2.35


Transport. Cost from IL-'
Total Corn Cost from IL

FOB Price (Georgia) !/
Transport. Cost from GA1-'
Total Corn Cost from GA

Georgia Corn Transport.
as % of Corn Value

Georgia Corn as % of'
Animal Value

Corn Transport. as %
of Animal Value

Other States Corn
Transport. as % of
Corn Value

Other State Corn as %
of Animal Value

Corn Transport. as %
of Animal Value


$/bu
$/bu


$/bu
$/bu
$/bu


.35
2.69

2.60
.13
2.73


.05


16.09

.77


.13


15.85

2.06


.35
2.60

2.45
.13
2.58


.05

14.13

.71


.14


14.23

2.03


.38
2.08

2.00
.14
2.14


.07

11.80

.77


.18


11.47

2.10


.39
2.23


2.10
.14
2.24


.06

11.79

.74


.17


11.73

2.05


.40
2.46

2.20
.14
2.34


.06


11.41

.68


.16

12.00

1.95


.41
2.68


2.60
.15
2.75


.05


11.15

.61


.17

10.87

1.66


.42
2.47


2.25
.15
2.40


.06


9.97

.62


.17


10.26

1.74


.43
2.46


2.30
.15
2.45


.06


9.99

.61


.17


10.03

1.75


.47
2.64


2.35
.17
2.52


.07

8.60

.58


.18

9.01

1.60


.48
2.85

3.00
.17
3.17


.05


9.76

.52


.17

8.77

1.48


.50
3.05

2.80
.18
2.98


.06


10.10

.61


.16

10.33

1.69


.51
.286

2.80
.19
2.99


.06

9.98

.63


.18

9.55

1.70











Table 14.--(con't)


CORN UNITS

FOB Price-(Illinois)-! $/by 2.
Transport. Cost from IL1- $/bu .5
Total Corn Cost from IL $/bu 2.


FOB Price (Georgia) / $/bu
Transport. Cost from GA1/ $/bu .2
Total Corn cost from GA $/bu 2.


Georgia Corn Transport.
as % of Corn Value % .0

Georgia Corn as % of
Animal Value % 9.

Corn Transport. as %
of Animal Value % .7

Other States Corn
Transport. as % of
Corn Value % .1

Other State Corn as
% of Other Value % 9

Other Transport. as %
of Animal Value % 1

1/'Gold Kist, Live Oak, Florida

2/ High corn high fuel; low corn low corn


19

.62

.77


-prinq I -~T


Spring,
LC LC


3.00
.80
3.80


3.50
.50
4.00


1980
1 II


35 2.55
3 .55
88 3.10


70 2.90
2 .24
92 3.14


18 .08

75

'3


HC HF


4.00
1.00
5.00


4.30
.80
5.10

Low Cattle
.16

11.98

1.88


.20

1.75

2.35


.17

S 7.07


1.49


HC LF


4.00
.80
4.80


4.30
.50
4.80

High Cattle
.10

7.44


1.93


--


Lc HF 2/


3.00
1.00
4.00


3.50
.80
4.30









per animal fed. Assuming the importedd corn is from Georgia, the
transportation cost of the Georgia corn accounted for..77 percent of
the value of a 1050-pound fed animal. If, however, the imported corn was
Illinois corn, 2.06 percent of the value of the animal was attributed to
the transportation cost of the imported Illinois corn.
From the 1979 Florida feedlot study [13], it is determined that
approximately three-fifths of the imported corn is from Georgia and the
remaining two-fifths is from other states, primarily the Corn Belt. Thus
approximately 1.15 percent [7.4(3) + 1.77(2)/5] of the value of the fed
animal is attributed to the transportation cost of importing corn to
Florida feedlots. For some feedlots, the utilization rate of five pounds
of corn per pound of gain is low, so that the actual corn transportation
per animal value percentage would be higher.
The analysis of the 1977-80 data shows that transportation is a smaller
than expected amount of a feeder cattle or fed animal's value. In Table 15,
I .-_-^ i- 1 -L _C -- r -Z- -- 4- -. 4 j .kl.4 *fuknm 4-li 4m -\1 Or wnliia


In 1980, for example, the fed cattle transportation <
!der and fed animal) was $33.40 while the transportati(
corn Der head was $7.97 for a net transportation cost


iel price in


teases on this net cost.

PROJECTIONS

sta presented provide valuable insi!


oJec-Lons anu dcau L pri'ues snuu
industry being in the accelerate,
1











Table 4i5. Net dollar per head differential in transporting cattle Versus
transporting corn



First Quarter Costs
Item. .1 77 .. 978 I 979 1980
-----------------Dollars per head----------
Calves and 8.97 9.35 10.81 13.45
Fed Cattle 17.33 17.85 18.90 19.95
(Round Trip) 26.30 27.20 29.71: 33.40

Imported
Corn 5.15 5.46 6.80 7.97

Differential 21.25 21.74 22.91 25.43








used; however, the projected average price of all Florida calves ranging
between $125.00 and $150.00 per pwt. by the spring of 1985 (8.5 percent
and 10.8 percent compounded annual increase in prices from the first
quarter 1980 to first quarter 1985) ias chosen. The projected cattle
price range chosen is between (95.00 and $120.00 per cwt. (7.2 percent
and 12.2 percent annual rate of increase). A lower bound fuel price of
$3.00 per gallon is chosen for 1985 while the higher price is $4.00 per
gallon (Figure 1). In effect, diesel fuel cost is assumed to increase
between 200 and 300 percent respectively over the five year projection,
while the calf prices increase between 80 and 100 percent and fed cattle
prices increase between 45 and 85 percent. a/
Using the cattle and fuel price projections assumed for 1985, fuel
as a percent of the value of Florida feeder calves would range from a
low of 1.14 percent to 1.67 percent, a value ratio which is approximately
double the percentage in 1980. Fuel costs attributed to transporting fed
cattle would increase from about 0.88 percent of the value of the animal
to between 1.48 percent and 2.49 percent of the value of the animal, an
increase of 100 to 200 percent over 1980 figures, but still a low fig-
ure in comparison to the value of the animal, relocation costs, etc.
Corn prices have been fairly steady over the last three and one-half
years and the long range outlook indicates only moderate price increases
(approximately 50 percent) whereas the per bushel transportation charges
wijl increase at least 100 percent. Our estimates for 1985 indicate the
transportation cost pf shipping Georgia corn could range from 10 to 20
percept of he value f corn, while the transportation cost of the corn
imported from other states would be slightly higher, ranging from 17 to
25 percent. The net result is that these estimates reflect little change
from the current transportation charge as a percent of the value of corn
imported from other than Georgia, but a 200 percent increase in the trans-
portation cost of importing Georgia corn as a percent of its value. As
a percent of the fed cattle value, the transportation cost for shipping
corn is projected to be about 0.20 percent, a slight increase above cur-
rent ratios.
The analysis indicates that in 1985, the net difference between
transportation costs attributed to hauling calves to Texas and fed
cattle to Florida on a backhaul and the transportation cost of importing












Transportation rate (dollars per cwt.)


- r 4 -
/


* .


0'
\'*


*il-.
^ .
0 0


L- C.
o' *'
0 . ,


*


0


.- 4




-
0.


00


9
5-Il

U\
S


4





%I


9%


*~


('-M3 jed SJelilop) seo!Jd ej-4e3o


c





o
0o
I_



*3-
0



C- in







co -
in




0
S L


(0
cr
0(
U)
-c c

ro
c








0o




ro O
CO+-


I
-D






0)




10



r-



CD ( (


S



I

I



*1




* I

~I


0 0 0 0 0 0
(N 0 C0 \0 a 0 0


~sc,


a **








corn to Florida feedlots will increase to $46,40, which is about 82
percent more than in 1980, However, jn our judgement, this increase is
not sufficient to make feeding cattle in Florida appreciably more profit-
able.
SUMMARY

The analysis indicates there will be little additional incentive to
encourage feedlot development in Florida based on large diesel fuel and
transportation cost increases. This comment is because the value of
feeder and fed cattle will also increase. Consequently, there may be
a disincentive to encourage feedlot development if corn is to remain the
ration mainstay among feedlots as transportation costs are expected to
increase disproportionately faster than will the price of corn. Given
the current Florida supply of corn relative to its demand by Florida
poultry, dairy, and swine industries, the likeTihoodof greatly increased
corn production in Florida to meet all of these demands plus the feeder
cattle demand is not likely.
Consequently, our analysis reflects that the transportation cost
associated with hauling Florida calves out of state, and backhauling
fed cattle into Florida is not of sufficient magnitude to be a major
determinant in any decision to expand cattle feeding. Rather, we believe
that structure factors such as the packing industry, environmental reg-
ulations, and spatial equilibrium will be more important. The results
of our projections, although derived by simple methods compared to spat-
ial equilibrium computer models, support and complement the findings
associated with regional specialization and the comparative advantage
of resource utilization.









FOOTNOTES

a/ Calf prices increase much mone rapidly than fed cattle prices
at this level of prices because feed is held relatively constant
in cost. In effect, a cattle feeder can afford to pay proportion-
ately more for feeder cattle as price levels rise because feed be-
comes an increasingly smaller part of the fed animal's value. The
margin changes from positive to negative at about $40.)0 per cwt.
(Figure 1).











[I] Aylor, F.I. and M,E. Juillerat, Least Cost Movement Analysis of
Slaughter Cattle and Calves with Emphasis on the Southeast, Bulletin
133, Southern Cooperative Serlei, January, 1968

[2] Browser, Max F., and John W. Goodwin, Optimum Distribution Patterns
'for Feeder Cattle, Technical Bulletin T-123, Oklahoma State Univer-
sity, June, 1968.

[3] Carmon, Hoy F., California's Competitive Position in Cattle Feeding
and Poultry: A Review of Interregional Competition Studies No. 72-1,
Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics, University of Calif-
ornia, October, 1972.

[4] Dietrich, Raymond A., Interregional Competition in the Cattle Feeding
Economy, B-1115, Texas A & M University, September, 1971.

[5] Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, Florida Agricultural
Statistics: Livestock Summary 1979, Orlando, 1980.

[6] Goodwin, John W., and J. Richard Crow, Optimal Regional Locations of
Beef Production and Processing Enterprises, Bulletin B-707, Oklahoma
State University, July 1973.

[7] Heady, Earl 0. and Uma K. Srivastava, Spatial Sector Programming
Models in Agriculture, Iowa State University Press, Ames, 1975.

[8] King, G.A. and L.F. Schrader, "Regional Location of Cattle Feeding--
A Spatial Equilibrium Analysis," Hilgardia, Vol. 34, No. 10, July,
1963, pp. 331-416.

[9] Liu, Charles Y., and Donald A. West, A Spatial Analysis of Beef
Feeding and Slaughtering with Emphasis on the South, Bulletin 177,
Southern Cooperative Series, 1973.
[I0] Mallett, James I., "Spatial Equilibrium and Regional Development,"
Contributed Paper, 1977 AAEA Annual Meeting, Texas A & M Agricultural
Experiment Station Techincal Article TA-9989, 1972.

[I11 Malphrus, L.D. C.Y. Liu and R.J. Freund, Cattle and Calf Movement
in the South, Southern Cooperative Series Bulletin 134, March, 1968.













n- .IAmFmc R.P -nd F-S. Rsimrw .Ar- -SqrInriAlrrI ;;nri nnt-rrn--inniI


in process for


and Operating Cc
Feedlots: Summa
Department, Univ

[15] U.S. Department
Statistical Bull

[16] 1979
Handbook No. 561

[17 ] Oper
No. 342, Washing


=ma ^ r.- Tural enort
m t


B. Bald
or Two
taff Pa
y of Fl

ricultu
No. 522

book of
hington

s of Fo
D.C., I


and F.S
s and T
142, Fo
a, Janu

Livesto
pplemen

icultur
C. 1976

re Live


ker, J
Sizes
nd Res
1980.

nd Mea
or var

harts,



k Truc


Station Bulletir

r., Investment
of Florida
ource Economics



t Statistics,
ious years.

Agricultural



king Firms, AER


I IM I IIrncn rt~1-tn I-i I Wcn iri m~.n1c in -Ihn I-r~rfr nnri I-ihnr


A--'I IOa;F;


I '~


r




Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
fcla fda yes
!-- economic analysis of the effect increasing transportation costs on Florida's cattle feeding industry ( Book ) --
METS:mets OBJID UF00091352_00001
xmlns:METS http:www.loc.govMETS
xmlns:xlink http:www.w3.org1999xlink
xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance
xmlns:daitss http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss
xmlns:mods http:www.loc.govmodsv3
xmlns:sobekcm http:digital.uflib.ufl.edumetadatasobekcm
xmlns:lom http:digital.uflib.ufl.edumetadatasobekcm_lom
xsi:schemaLocation
http:www.loc.govstandardsmetsmets.xsd
http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitss.xsd
http:www.loc.govmodsv3mods-3-4.xsd
http:digital.uflib.ufl.edumetadatasobekcmsobekcm.xsd
METS:metsHdr CREATEDATE 2020-08-13T22:31:49Z ID LASTMODDATE 2018-06-21T08:58:43Z RECORDSTATUS COMPLETE
METS:agent ROLE CREATOR TYPE ORGANIZATION
METS:name UF,University of Florida
OTHERTYPE SOFTWARE OTHER
Go UFDC - FDA Preparation Tool
INDIVIDUAL
UFAD\renner
METS:dmdSec DMD1
METS:mdWrap MDTYPE MODS MIMETYPE textxml LABEL Metadata
METS:xmlData
mods:mods
mods:accessCondition The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not claim any copyright interest in this item. This item may be protected by copyright but is made available here under a claim of fair use (17 U.S.C. §107) for non-profit research and educational purposes. Users of this work have responsibility for determining copyright status prior to reusing, publishing or reproducing this item for purposes other than what is allowed by fair use or other copyright exemptions. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder. The Smathers Libraries would like to learn more about this item and invite individuals or organizations to contact Digital Services (UFDC@uflib.ufl.edu) with any additional information they can provide.
mods:genre authority marcgt bibliography
non-fiction
mods:identifier type oclc 22412548
mods:language
mods:languageTerm text English
code iso639-2b eng
mods:location
mods:physicalLocation University of Florida
UF
mods:url access object in context http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00091352/00001
mods:name personal NAM1
mods:namePart Stegelin, Forrest E
given Forrest E
family Stegelin
date 1947-
mods:displayForm Forrest Eugene
mods:role
mods:roleTerm Main Entity
Simpson, James R
James R
Simpson
mods:note bibliography Includes bibliographical references (p. 30-31).
"August 1980."
Some copies have Staff Paper 161r and corrections have been made to the tables in ink.
statement responsibility F.E. Stegelin & J.R. Simpson.
mods:originInfo
mods:publisher Food and Resource Economics Dept., Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida
mods:place
mods:placeTerm marccountry flu
mods:dateIssued 1980
marc 1980
point start 1980
mods:recordInfo
mods:recordIdentifier source sobekcm UF00091352_00001
mods:recordCreationDate 900920
mods:recordOrigin Imported from (OCLC)22412548
mods:recordContentSource University of Florida
marcorg FBA
FUG
AGX
OCLCQ
OCLCG
mods:languageOfCataloging
English
eng
mods:relatedItem original
mods:physicalDescription
mods:extent 31 p. : ; 28 cm.
series
mods:titleInfo
mods:title Staff paper
mods:subject SUBJ650_1 lcsh
mods:topic Trucking
Economic aspects
mods:geographic Florida
SUBJ650_2
Feed industry
Transportation
Economic aspects
Florida
SUBJ650_3
Flour industry
Transportation
Economic aspects
Florida
mods:nonSort An
economic analysis of the effect of increasing transportation costs on Florida's cattle feeding industry
mods:typeOfResource text
DMD2
OTHERMDTYPE SOBEKCM SobekCM Custom
sobekcm:procParam
sobekcm:Aggregation FAO1
UFIR
IFSA
IUF
sobekcm:MainThumbnail 00001thm.jpg
sobekcm:bibDesc
sobekcm:BibID UF00091352
sobekcm:VID 00001
sobekcm:EncodingLevel I
sobekcm:Publisher
sobekcm:Name Food and Resource Economics Dept., Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida
sobekcm:PlaceTerm Gainesville
sobekcm:Source
sobekcm:statement UF University of Florida
sobekcm:SortDate 722814
METS:amdSec
METS:digiprovMD DIGIPROV1
DAITSS Archiving Information
daitss:daitss
daitss:AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT PROJECT UFDC
METS:techMD TECH1
File Technical Details
sobekcm:FileInfo
sobekcm:File fileid JPEG1 width 630 height 857
JP21 2352 3200
JPEG2
JP22
JPEG3
JP23
JPEG4 432
JP24 3084 2116
JPEG5
JP25
JPEG6 463
JP26
JPEG7
JP27
JPEG8
JP28
JPEG9
JP29
JPEG10
JP210
JPEG11
JP211
JPEG12
JP212
JPEG13
JP213
JPEG14
JP214
JPEG15
JP215
JPEG16
JP216
JPEG17
JP217
JPEG18
JP218
JPEG19
JP219
JPEG20
JP220
JPEG21
JP221
JPEG22
JP222
JPEG23
JP223
JPEG24
JP224
JPEG25
JP225
JPEG26
JP226
JPEG27
JP227
JPEG28
JP228
JPEG29
JP229
JPEG30
JP230
JPEG31
JP231
JPEG32
JP232
METS:fileSec
METS:fileGrp USE reference
METS:file GROUPID G1 imagejpeg CHECKSUM 7657d98fb8514fd97bdfa9c48c71da7c CHECKSUMTYPE MD5 SIZE 31164
METS:FLocat LOCTYPE OTHERLOCTYPE SYSTEM xlink:href 00001.jpg
JPEG1.2 f39768ac17a9c3a3015cf2c528f67aa4 29724
00001.QC.jpg
G2 88046188ff4567ebca91022e9aab4a6d 128842
00003.jpg
JPEG2.2 3d50466b6e457e9f43e653b315ed8b4c 76452
00003.QC.jpg
G3 b18d003ca7319be846d895271f4b977f 49127
00004.jpg
JPEG3.2 58aedd439ffe2e163d1dcb29dbbe78cd 39639
00004.QC.jpg
G4 74aaf9dd0e08bbfaa32aa09e67c3f455 42546
00005.jpg
JPEG4.2 61212d4978893a4935a5729ccf2e8561 37690
00005.QC.jpg
G5 a7049e24a717efceb18572703aaedbef 29596
00006.jpg
JPEG5.2 be0c348dcd5174c9ec321411e9e5e030 32127
00006.QC.jpg
G6 a6eac4c54481582d87ee155ae090b03e 29239
00007.jpg
JPEG6.2 c006399a11e324aedd0c584206ef471a 31264
00007.QC.jpg
G7 a9ec0ce2a94fa69aeec9d15ce39b544f 132507
00008.jpg
JPEG7.2 e47ed1befc9425cd416d4cdff50f045b 79232
00008.QC.jpg
G8 ee5942b9361ad1adf5add0222f455e8e 37419
00009.jpg
JPEG8.2 96efb3534613fc6f48ba312ccff5b880 34868
00009.QC.jpg
G9 186e35236809388ee7da04660a5dbcf0 40717
00010.jpg
JPEG9.2 27ef1e7647f2bc9d366dad68b071d227 35746
00010.QC.jpg
G10 d0bedadf5c1ff856d049879454994bd4 40281
00011.jpg
JPEG10.2 c8bb9ba670c9d5c5a9ac8538904b6a18 36481
00011.QC.jpg
G11 1aa52dce167859aab9d9ade1fd32dbcb 129468
00012.jpg
JPEG11.2 56357bee6d1519af62c66fb3eca50b5e 77372
00012.QC.jpg
G12 45fe35f95e3d2f034a523ac856144ddf 37595
00013.jpg
JPEG12.2 967d28264578f80aa656e73c3977a7f6 34341
00013.QC.jpg
G13 befd34acaf105d1e0cd0eec1c7a1541b 45651
00014.jpg
JPEG13.2 7950332cf8008b1a0af36704bf7efe33 38637
00014.QC.jpg
G14 bf58ced4521a26ea71c9890230b6561a 27471
00015.jpg
JPEG14.2 bbc83093bfaccc4ac0ae60a95fc306d7 32859
00015.QC.jpg
G15 0be9d1dbc63b0041cafed1e2f336d48f 132869
00016.jpg
JPEG15.2 b54c090ac3dae9d5fd07464712c26a2e 78500
00016.QC.jpg
G16 49aa890332eee4ba25e687bcc16cad93 51661
00017.jpg
JPEG16.2 5b8b3ca48530d33cd9ff8a0032d74b1c 42164
00017.QC.jpg
G17 c904053ae5be2cfd96c0802d8b857670 137384
00018.jpg
JPEG17.2 21bab42837a1789fd6c5e2d103edccd3 80557
00018.QC.jpg
G18 c1be60cb5330d738b32ee096dffcb7e5 35728
00019.jpg
JPEG18.2 ae4cffb1f8090ac2dfa91aec3f977547 34787
00019.QC.jpg
G19 2ebb1858dd79b78fb242ed210c5015c3 46810
00020.jpg
JPEG19.2 b34051294da776c36e0a6246790194bc 39581
00020.QC.jpg
G20 66b76db30bc47bfdf0386d6640b5bc34 127224
00021.jpg
JPEG20.2 b4cf170eafa7c3c92d0b1ca629b94457 77247
00021.QC.jpg
G21 62a0f4f1fe93df321b657ecb695a596c 34776
00022.jpg
JPEG21.2 1fe47d19532365c84c245d0cbfcb7649 15236
00022.QC.jpg
G22 74c2edc83ac4dd5fc02f7a1c719f8dfd 45393
00023.jpg
JPEG22.2 9a32e303cd4d6d11752b7119defec7bc 19724
00023.QC.jpg
G23 581dda0e8c7a4887903253678f1c126f 38753
00024.jpg
JPEG23.2 3682e822b429cacf2b0ca864d9e5aa36 19360
00024.QC.jpg
G24 9fae0fbc91cec4029f24f5fd5fb0a37e 27648
00025.jpg
JPEG24.2 4d468bad4c0dcab870f56780518f2086 12435
00025.QC.jpg
G25 c9dc553f88c08addffd6d652bc4c1196 124001
00026.jpg
JPEG25.2 cc865b5e3d050c1f8c7fbc088e15de32 53958
00026.QC.jpg
G26 9e0e24fd2eaacfd8129d04f81ae4dd49 32607
00027.jpg
JPEG26.2 ac4e31cd039a695285889ad259e70cc7 13431
00027.QC.jpg
G27 0b70f8b7f58ebe52a4d3a7eb5971aed3 132840
00028.jpg
JPEG27.2 c57e0914e2d2f5194ecda66994bd9598 56976
00028.QC.jpg
G28 c6d0dba605e75d1d1b0b307245ef53b8 43880
00029.jpg
JPEG28.2 6406da99762464f7c5ee88546d27d13d 22090
00029.QC.jpg
G29 eb56f533b60ff9def6f4ece3ee1fde93 89451
00030.jpg
JPEG29.2 bbe41daddd36b6b38c21722bd8157c22 38950
00030.QC.jpg
G30 05447c0ee2a949cd84b033568ebb14c9 31276
00031.jpg
JPEG30.2 7353034fb1ce41f08de9dbdbef1a689b 13122
00031.QC.jpg
G31 c13b6f700abf0241855983d8be87616e 100017
00033.jpg
JPEG31.2 6f040166d2a99d31ca85806db5caf9ea 44787
00033.QC.jpg
G32 3d81d93404ed9ccae6552af96e02733c 72938
00034.jpg
JPEG32.2 f48e525745cdc44644bae123c939991b 35419
00034.QC.jpg
imagejp2 422ff90628c1d9ddfc44781ecc1bf43a 318953
00001.jp2
7c1ef4f6ef22be8ffb523cc12a8d62fe 940856
00003.jp2
cca779047c98e843f3e14f879208a250 590418
00004.jp2
7a79268e82ef11ec51a61cfcc03e28f5 803081
00005.jp2
412f1b5e412a4e077adbb89596f4a1c7 338826
00006.jp2
a8515aa6b862801d75baa3f682ed7081 588735
00007.jp2
dc22a1ef6ecc907d6634f16085e77fcb 940904
00008.jp2
e86ac62adf84ab3c8e427b6763b98c03 764337
00009.jp2
8fa34680fd7f0d1431c9bdd21afb8509 489617
00010.jp2
b2e3da26fb53b27570628dee9c78bbc1 500744
00011.jp2
347868f3d7908be830d7714be84a469f 940890
00012.jp2
652003a1d0d7a5f3758f515d6aac8334 423263
00013.jp2
0c5e1a8374a39f07042b8c6fcb6676b4 558178
00014.jp2
ddd6f91f7e3c5968e25495632e93093a 563435
00015.jp2
e87f343291f3fb53f8721ab2ea5beb0f 940849
00016.jp2
43f1084458c3341867794412624f972c 672514
00017.jp2
b68efe1103c31bab40de0b152cda2b60 940870
00018.jp2
17aebe7ccffea13686dd9052f1d0482f 697065
00019.jp2
164cea668070efa24d1c5935877f5c2b 892726
00020.jp2
443df5678b3ba8276aa8371fc5e234ca
00021.jp2
5a09756cfbcbdcb8b85df1fe35c85c35 76644
00022.jp2
a03328028b8bbecb2417847aa87e1a8f 99147
00023.jp2
dccc9918c79f90c2d005fe17137ef689 77560
00024.jp2
cbd6addeca6cff515c864cf775620b22 57038
00025.jp2
19b9c423ab2c32ee6e8d4f4e41355567 149485
00026.jp2
994321ba53906e37f554ff9f26530990 41223
00027.jp2
b6684f32e5ddd2d833ab5745af94c82e 162552
00028.jp2
3a6fbd5829772bb3a61071f5a98480f3 53595
00029.jp2
5b5a6273b44217ebb3de1599b296f54d 110756
00030.jp2
53750b9f3d0005b434bf853d276f7771 38351
00031.jp2
e118f31da3331fbbd958792db3622bbb 129376
00033.jp2
708210f8c2eb7f2ba6e8d5ba186d0d44 94943
00034.jp2
archive
TIF1 imagetiff 17fc4e3a0938ae32abbc140d3ddd2e21 1638856
00001.tif
TIF2 097a3a90f6993881eae6a9021010b17e 1643520
00003.tif
TIF3 3b422ce8e9357e30f2e777b410388a73 1639856
00004.tif
TIF4 bf2fdb43524717dbd88b519d51774180 837296
00005.tif
TIF5 193b3380d11bb4f59f5e4a28fb39611c 1639020
00006.tif
TIF6 130e0bc506fd04846894bda6ba4afd0c 894840
00007.tif
TIF7 73ccf1504de0beef47044cb4f4a28672 1643816
00008.tif
TIF8 60f7bf975df69df21bb08d7c78280a07 895508
00009.tif
TIF9 f3a5690400a0fb053d019c5c1d70ec33 1639380
00010.tif
TIF10 4cd459b1a4f3b1402e1fed93f967258d 1639420
00011.tif
TIF11 47298e25a58243534efa8b20819d5012 1643716
00012.tif
TIF12 ebdcad92eaf36fd6b47bfd2f97e35a0f 1639276
00013.tif
TIF13 ddfa25cae2f440be0a53654496e3e6d7 1639816
00014.tif
TIF14 7a217cc49d057472c44a07e0d2da8c35 895260
00015.tif
TIF15 026a2db0d7d95f919f67114ee2c2fed0 1643704
00016.tif
TIF16 f13d0367dcf2d1a8dbe334494ea42191 1640016
00017.tif
TIF17 d702e79a6a7dcf08a1bec0cc2c6f95b5 1643892
00018.tif
TIF18 aab932ad1b3bd23375b63562e1225df4 895532
00019.tif
TIF19 f630b0ce0958d53dacaf5cbaf72e5a3b 896268
00020.tif
TIF20 901782bcef1a3377f2ec6a0563c7d3ac 1643116
00021.tif
TIF21 53aad5781dc556f4d416eda7c1c41d45 875336
00022.tif
TIF22 68d55e1a7a02961caf6a448128c847d4
00023.tif
TIF23 54a599b1eaf88a36d880849214b95500
00024.tif
TIF24 85d6291b8cc2afd1d4faf75342bbbe45
00025.tif
TIF25 e05817d629a8ab18101c8db8182a2397 1619996
00026.tif
TIF26 74bcc9ca2be8824252cd3e1d9c1cf4ce
00027.tif
TIF27 937a6cc4b6c09bd9c7f25f806a7d2655
00028.tif
TIF28 f22f414b38d4c8bace217b714a6c58de
00029.tif
TIF29 dd9e9c02ddf04b12087b68a319c9d909
00030.tif
TIF30 22620146783c28258a7d23a8ffa56c69
00031.tif
TIF31 3b262f70d6359b14aba03f88e4acd5f2
00033.tif
TIF32 e791ab750479f8198d106c0df01a2eb6
00034.tif
THUMB1 imagejpeg-thumbnails 77a057397e9d5ef79711b33df4f7bb01 22176
00001thm.jpg
THUMB2 2e2bd8c72038f7c89d99f1d04ede7654 35517
00003thm.jpg
THUMB3 d3655dc00d3d5ceafd1d63bf2e14dd10 25571
00004thm.jpg
THUMB4 76d15a9402e59767789f81158b240a00 25035
00005thm.jpg
THUMB5 ca398a7a06e64227e4720fdac76c72d1 22809
00006thm.jpg
THUMB6 533bf305559a92bfecc18bcfb11ee8cb 22581
00007thm.jpg
THUMB7 09174b371deb82d1a88e0a30bb0ef956 35850
00008thm.jpg
THUMB8 5d14e1af9b7db27a05147ded8742f6c6 24220
00009thm.jpg
THUMB9 afbd5e7f68988d1841847aedf6c8b9d0 23695
00010thm.jpg
THUMB10 8ae52c741a5d917cc93df5d2e7af3df2 24364
00011thm.jpg
THUMB11 2f7fdc6ec98a69fe25208e8acd685fee 35762
00012thm.jpg
THUMB12 f5ffb176c534885a69d4149942729d07 23511
00013thm.jpg
THUMB13 5de4ca65f26ad31c7f6bbe7765200ef7 25179
00014thm.jpg
THUMB14 c57d8976daadfc124718e056cb6a6724 23596
00015thm.jpg
THUMB15 bfb57b4d0b068755c1b4f64a6e7a90ba 35717
00016thm.jpg
THUMB16 60e53000f4d4d1b9bd09f0343dddd330 25773
00017thm.jpg
THUMB17 cd2d14fbf56cd19dd7492702864a7e6c 36616
00018thm.jpg
THUMB18 37201c5f6e0c2673766141f79df45a74 23857
00019thm.jpg
THUMB19 2bb27f6bce7686e73f959793d7c62d26 25813
00020thm.jpg
THUMB20 60338da53da62cf2f165532919eafd1c 35062
00021thm.jpg
THUMB21 3400a38617bcc841f65f1ce07b4fe1cc 4160
00022thm.jpg
THUMB22 4840b853317b7b4096d21e607d45be55 5370
00023thm.jpg
THUMB23 fa52a4308df4cda2a03c6e3d64da5a09 5308
00024thm.jpg
THUMB24 04beedef51706cedfe5d67dd47033f9a 3734
00025thm.jpg
THUMB25 d40e815ad02d5a072665554c99966eea 12145
00026thm.jpg
THUMB26 621c0b4b64b930e39b209577e26a8a1d 3551
00027thm.jpg
THUMB27 634b48b6a1e5e069a04148dc2e493647 12822
00028thm.jpg
THUMB28 43898fb69358441ac900dd8125be2505 6998
00029thm.jpg
THUMB29 8fa6fcc473c8cd65e313f4b444f6e81a 8979
00030thm.jpg
THUMB30 2a42a44c80d8256466589dc203ae27d9 3385
00031thm.jpg
THUMB31 c67da18c5c6d53d8bdfae6db58f4d8ec 10332
00033thm.jpg
THUMB32 cfe64f5b837c5499a9cef490fbe5984a 8263
00034thm.jpg
TXT1 textplain a63b902b6317b893b14aaae5d6b05ea1 540
00001.txt
TXT2 807c410273a8d9ff9dc4525997b58230 2355
00003.txt
TXT3 96438749e192ee5b3bdbe994682472d0 555
00004.txt
TXT4 0f6adbf51a05ce1813ea13731e6d7332 974
00005.txt
TXT5 735576e38d3126bcb3e1c737870f75bc 311
00006.txt
TXT6 f0275f750cb558c4c18f0f481acfcfa7 553
00007.txt
TXT7 0cc7fcb37dd6345996816996a911957c 2400
00008.txt
TXT8 2f5283ccb8ad4e441d67c8d278308f7c 587
00009.txt
TXT9 b7d646e0bf6cc8291eec21d430b52726 613
00010.txt
TXT10 bde9a18d03bfec03e707610382a56920 569
00011.txt
TXT11 fb37f303322c6b4e59a2d3336ee38f99 1384
00012.txt
TXT12 9d85d2d0d1a2a1a530261ff58a70d8b7 609
00013.txt
TXT13 d4d3cc924944b073de86eec7c4f475f9 492
00014.txt
TXT14 63c635a456a2e3a0fbc7ee9619255747 465
00015.txt
TXT15 e4bf67851104e020bd2b3d038f2d875a 1801
00016.txt
TXT16 a2987a7dcda241299de6e1726f22de32 804
00017.txt
TXT17 f55cf40622dc309fc2f22f81f56384fa 2503
00018.txt
TXT18 d73c1fb5b9a549bd501f414f0ebb1b58 601
00019.txt
TXT19 74239b223735f25b941c2431508afa68 1880
00020.txt
TXT20 683e4594ed039a1c6bdb534ef0924b11 2264
00021.txt
TXT21 3fd07ba819855ae5d9fe2e5ed19d74c4 1529
00022.txt
TXT22 7580599c230268d89a871707108b0b69 1360
00023.txt
TXT23 2a803f5666fe8a9936ab91ecbc125a5d 1784
00024.txt
TXT24 460bdaa1e1c319eb58073c5e41bd8421 1154
00025.txt
TXT25 2924eae5e41e6d77253d9521406c53c0 1487
00026.txt
TXT26 403dd93cc98dd12674fd9f552975d1fa 409
00027.txt
TXT27 b367006a58d60585234c6d4027c3c17e 2533
00028.txt
TXT28 28ebfc037e2ee9204b5e8616d9e5f470 671
00029.txt
TXT29 3b23e41cc27c6e9e487c0c884d19b85c 1660
00030.txt
TXT30 bf826140ec94e66bc0493015f7ed1f0d 443
00031.txt
TXT31 55ec35658a321a098a0291306fadc3d1 1890
00033.txt
TXT32 3ae8fe88d60f25867878a840c64c5445 835
00034.txt
TXT1.2
TXT2.2
TXT3.2
TXT4.2
TXT5.2
TXT6.2
TXT7.2
TXT8.2
TXT9.2
TXT10.2
TXT11.2
TXT12.2
TXT13.2
TXT14.2
TXT15.2
TXT16.2
TXT17.2
TXT18.2
TXT19.2
TXT20.2
TXT21.2
TXT22.2
TXT23.2
TXT24.2
TXT25.2
TXT26.2
TXT27.2
TXT28.2
TXT29.2
TXT30.2
TXT31.2
TXT32.2
G33 METS33 unknownx-mets 740a0775100fcba6f9389222a19899c1 47882
UF00091352_00001.mets
METS:structMap STRUCT1 physical
METS:div DMDID ADMID An ORDER 0 main
PDIV1 Title Page 1
PAGE1 i
METS:fptr FILEID
PDIV2 Present situation 2 Chapter
PAGE2
PAGE3
PAGE4 3
PAGE5 4
PAGE6 5
PAGE7 6
PAGE8 7
PAGE9 8
PAGE10 9
PDIV3 Structure Florida’s compared with other areas United States Estimations impact from higher
PAGE11 10
PAGE12 11
PAGE13 12
PAGE14 13
PAGE15 14
PAGE16 15
PAGE17 16
PAGE18 17
PAGE19 18
PAGE20 19
PAGE21 20
PAGE22 21
PAGE23 22
PAGE24 23
PAGE25 24
PAGE26 25
PAGE27 26
PAGE28 27
PDIV4 Summary
PAGE29 28
PDIV5 Footnotes
PAGE30 29
PDIV6 References
PAGE31 30
PAGE32 31
STRUCT2
ODIV1 Main
FILES1
FILES2
FILES3
FILES4
FILES5
FILES6
FILES7
FILES8
FILES9
FILES10
FILES11
FILES12
FILES13
FILES14
FILES15
FILES16
FILES17
FILES18
FILES19
FILES20
FILES21
FILES22
FILES23
FILES24
FILES25
FILES26
FILES27
FILES28
FILES29
FILES30
FILES31
FILES32 32
FILES33 33