Oklahoma Farm Report masthead graphic with wheat on the left and cattle on the right.
Howdy Neighbors!
Ron Hays, Director of Farm and Ranch Programming, Radio Oklahoma Ag Network  |  2401 Exchange Ave, Suite F, Oklahoma City, Ok 73108  |  (405) 601-9211

advertisements
   
   
   
   
   
   

Agricultural News


Farm Bureau Continues Fight for Fair Cattle Prices

Thu, 28 May 2020 07:59:53 CDT

Farm Bureau Continues Fight for Fair Cattle Prices Major upheaval in U.S. cattle markets has increased attention on the growing gap between high beef prices and low cattle prices. Always with an eye on how the organization can help its farmer and rancher members, the American Farm Bureau Federation is working aggressively, particularly during the coronavirus pandemic, to make sure livestock producers are fairly compensated for their cattle.

Farm Bureau’s efforts on that front include calling for investigations by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and USDA into questionable market practices; meeting with both CFTC and USDA officials to convey a strong interest in a robust investigation of any market-distorting activities; and working with government entities and other agricultural organizations to engage in aggressive oversight of cattle markets to ensure producers are paid fair value for their livestock.

AFBF also supports the Trump administration’s initiative to have USDA investigate potential market-distorting tactics.

Lawmakers, too, are looking at the disparity between high beef prices and low cattle prices. Among the proposals being floated to address this concern is one that would require packers to buy a percentage of their weekly cattle purchases on the cash market.

Beyond this approach’s conflict with AFBF policy, a mandatory cash market minimum presents several other problems, not the least of which is the improbability of it providing higher returns for producers.

AFBF policy, crafted by farmer and rancher delegates to the organization’s Annual Convention, opposes a mandatory minimum for negotiated cattle slaughter because it would restrict producers’ ability to enter into progressive, value-added cattle pricing arrangements and contracts.

“Mandates on cash trade ultimately limit the use of the alternative marketing agreements that allow producers to respond to consumer-driven market demands,” explained Michael Nepveux, AFBF livestock economist.

Nepveux also noted there’s no simple way to alleviate COVID-19’s unprecedented external shock to the overall food system.

“No amount of cash trade would provide relief from these supply chain challenges,” he said.

Additionally, a mandatory minimum would require expanded federal oversight and more regulations for an already heavily regulated industry, with potentially no benefit.

And while cash market trade would boost price discovery – a good thing – it would not necessarily increase the prices producers are paid, which is the issue the proposal’s proponents say it is designed to address.

“We can and should promote a more robust price discovery system, but not at the expense of a producer’s ability to use value-based, consumer-driven marketing arrangements,” Nepveux said.

In fact, mandating a minimum number of cash purchases could end up costing producers and consumers. A recent white paper by Colorado State University’s Dr. Koontz indicates a mandatory policy of 50% minimum negotiated cash transactions would result in a $2.5 billion loss to the industry in the first year, and an overall loss of $16 billion over 10 years.

Several additional studies conducted by academic faculty at various land grant institutions on the costs and benefits of alternative marketing agreements and the impacts of mandatory minimum negotiated trading volumes show that limiting the use of AMAs by the beef industry will decrease efficiency, increase processing and marketing costs, and could potentially reduce beef product quality.

Another problem with the proposal is that the impact would be uneven across different regions of the country because negotiated trade is more common in certain states, such as Nebraska and Kansas, which have seen their negotiated percentage range from 40-75% in recent years. Other states typically have very little negotiated trade. In Texas and Oklahoma, for example, negotiated trade accounts for only 5-8% of cattle transactions. Nationally, negotiated trade sits around 20-23%.


   

 

WebReadyTM Powered by WireReady® NSI

 


Top Agricultural News

  • K-State Vet Shares Tips for Managing Cattle Through Heat  Sun, 05 Jul 2020 09:58:49 CDT
  • Lucas, Peterson Introduce RAMP-UP Act Helping Meat & Poultry Processors Access Inspection to Meet Demand  Fri, 03 Jul 2020 15:18:49 CDT
  • Congressman Frank Lucas Offers Legislation to RAMP-UP Federal Incentives for Small Meat Processors  Fri, 03 Jul 2020 13:28:52 CDT
  • AFR/OFU Thrilled with Introduction of RAMP-UP Act  Fri, 03 Jul 2020 09:06:49 CDT
  • Growth Energy Urges EPA to Combat Particulate Emissions with Low-Carbon Ethanol  Fri, 03 Jul 2020 09:04:49 CDT
  • Oklahoma Grain Elevator Cash Bids as of 2:00 p.m. Thursday, July 2  Thu, 02 Jul 2020 15:53:10 CDT
  • OSU's Kim Anderson Talks with SUNUP about Wheat Prices and the Wrap of the Oklahoma Wheat Harvest   Thu, 02 Jul 2020 15:52:12 CDT
  • Thursday, July 2, 2020 Market Wrap-Up with Justin Lewis  Thu, 02 Jul 2020 14:33:06 CDT

  • More Headlines...

       

    Ron salutes our daily email sponsors!

    Oklahoma City Farm Show KIS FUTURES, INC. Oklahoma Ag Credit Oklahoma Farm Bureau National Livestock Credit Ag Mediation Program P&K Equipment AFR Insurance Stillwater Milling Oklahoma Cattlemen's Association

    Our Road to Rural Prosperity sponsors!

    Banc First OPSRC ORWA TPAOO TPAOO

    Search OklahomaFarmReport.com


       
       
    © 2008-2020 Oklahoma Farm Report
    Email Ron   |   Newsletter Signup   |    Current Spots   |    Program Links

    WebReady powered by WireReady® Inc.