Commercial Agriculture Program

 

The Missouri Beef Audit:

Chapter 2: Current Competitive Position of Missouri’s Beef Industry

Missouri’s apparent comparative advantage in feeder calf production can be partially explained by a cost advantage in purchasing the major inputs of production: land, pasture rent, corn, hay, and farm labor.

2.1 Cost of Production

As a transition state from the Corn Belt to the Great Plains, Missouri exhibits lower land costs and lower pasture rental rates than other Corn Belt states. In addition, because Missouri is near major feed grain producing areas, corn and feed prices tend to be lower in Missouri than in areas further south or west.

2.1.1 Farm Real Estate Values

The cost of farm real estate is critical to the overhead cost associated with hay and pasture. Missouri farmland is less expensive than land in most of the states to the east, and more expensive than most of the states to the west. The average value per acre of farm real estate is shown in exhibit 2.1.1-1. In the year 2008, Missouri has an average farm real estate value per acre of $2,450, which is slightly higher than the U.S. average value per acre of $2,350.

Exhibit 2.1.1-1 Farm Real Estate: Average Value per Acre, by State, 2008

Farm Real Estate Source: USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service

2.1.2 Pastureland Value

Pastureland values as of 2008 for the United States are shown in exhibit 2.1.2-1. The land value for each state varies, mainly due to location, land productivity, and pressure from alternative uses. Missouri currently has an average pastureland value of $1,920 per acre, significantly above the pastureland values in states to the west of Missouri. The cost of the pastureland as a feed resource for beef cow enterprises depends upon both the cost of the land and upon how many acres of pasture have to be purchased or rented to support a beef cow.

Exhibit 2.1.2-1 Pasture: Average Value per Acre, by State, 2008

Average Value per Acre Source: USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service

2.1.3 Pastureland Cash Rent

State pasture rental rates in 2008 are compared in exhibit 2.1.3-1. Missouri had an average rental rate of $29.00 per acre for pastureland. It is important to note that pasture rental rates in different regions of Missouri varied by as much as 50%, (see exhibit 2.1.3-2). The range went from a high of $35 to a low of $13, based on Missouri results from a USDA survey in 2008. These rates reflected the relative scarcity of rental pasture and the productivity of the pastureland and its value to the lessee.

Exhibit 2.1.3-1 Pasture Cash Rent per Acre, by State, 2008

Cash Rent per Acre Source: USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service

Exhibit 2.1.3-2 Pasture Cash Rent Per Acre, Missouri, By County, 2008

County asture Cash Rent ($ per acre)
Adair 26.50
Audrain 35.00
Barry 22.50
Barton 26.00
Bates 32.00
Benton 21.00
Bollinger 18.00
Boone 20.00
Caldwell 24.50
Callaway 20.00
Camden 20.00
Cape Girardeau 33.00
Carroll 32.50
Cass 26.50
Cedar 24.00
Chariton 30.50
Christian 25.00
Clay 27.50
Clinton 32.50
Cole 22.50
Cooper 29.50
Crawford 13.00
Dade 28.50
Dallas 27.00
Daviess 30.00
DeKalb 33.50
Dent 21.50
Douglas 18.00
Franklin 20.00
Gasconade 19.00
Gentry 35.00
Greene 28.50
Grundy 26.50
Harrison 30.50
Henry 28.50
Hickory 21.00
Howell 22.50
Jasper 25.50
Johnson 28.00
Laclede 20.50
Lawrence 28.50
Linn 28.50
Macon 28.50
Maries 18.00
McDonald 20.50
Mercer 25.00
Miller 18.00
Moniteau 26.00
Monroe 35.00
Montgomery 26.50
Morgan 29.50
Newton 28.50
Nodaway 34.50
Oregon 20.50
Osage 21.50
Ozark 18.00
Pettis 30.50
Phelps 14.50
Pike 31.50
Platte 30.00
Polk 26.50
Putnam 29.50
Ray 26.00
Ripley 19.00
Saline 33.50
Schuyler 32.00
St. Clair 27.00
St. Francois 20.00
Ste Genevieve 20.50
Stone 25.50
Sullivan 27.50
Texas 23.00
Vernon 28.00
Webster 21.50
Worth 30.00
Wright 21.00

2.1.4 Corn Prices

The price of corn is a major component of the cost of cattle feeding. The corn basis price is the difference in price between a local bid price for corn and the nearby corn futures contract at the Chicago Board of Trade. Spatial maps of corn basis prices reflect the regional supply and demand differences for corn at any given moment. During harvest season, major corn producing areas show a depression in corn prices as storage elevators lower their harvest time bid as they fill with corn. The gradually rising basis throughout the year reflects the elevator’s recapture of storage costs as they gradually sell corn to users. Exhibit 2.1.4-1 depicts the corn price basis across most of the U.S. Corn Belt. Corn prices move higher as one moves farther south (i.e., along the Mississippi River) and west from the Corn Belt.

Exhibit 2.1.4-1 Seasonal Corn Price Basis Maps, Select Months, 2008-2009

2008 Corn Basis 2008 Corn Basis 2008 Corn Basis 2008 Corn Basis Source: Iowa State University, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development

2.1.5 Co-product Feed Availability and Prices

Missouri is positioned near numerous co-product feed outlets. The figure below indicates Midwestern ethanol production facilities. Eighty-four of these ethanol production facilities are located within 450 miles of Jefferson City, Missouri. Missouri's beef industry has a competitive advantage due to proximity to production facilities and shipping lanes as numerous co-products are manufactured or shipped through the St. Louis and Kansas City areas.

Co-products such as distillers grains, corn gluten feed, soybean hull and wheat middlings offer supplemental protein and/or energy in a low-starch feedstuff which incorporates into the forage-based diets of Missouri feeder cattle without impacting forage digestion. While corn is the predominate grain in finishing cattle diets, grain co-products offer alternative feed resources to the stocker and backgrounding industry.

Co-product prices are variable due to seasonal demand, source grain price, and transportation costs. Missouri's position near grain producing areas and co-product manufacturing facilities gives the beef industry the opportunity to substitute ingredients and nutrient sources based on price.

Exhibit 2.1.5-1 Ethanol Plants: Producing, Idle or Under Construction

Ethanol Plants Source: Iowa State University, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development

2.1.6 Hay Production and Prices

Missouri is a major hay producing state, harvesting around four million acres of hay annually in recent years. Approximately 10% of Missouri hay is alfalfa; most of the rest is tall fescue or mixed grass-legume hay containing fescue. Most hay is not sold on the open market but is instead used on-farm.

The prices in exhibit 2.1.6-1 reflect market prices but may overestimate the value of hay used on-farm. It is important to note that a significant part of the prices reported reflect transportation costs. Reports of large round bales of tall fescue trading in the $35 to $45 per ton at harvest are common in Missouri. When reviewing nationwide hay markets, few states report hay prices lower than Missouri. The exception is the gulf coast region where coastal Bermuda grass is often priced lower than tall fescue. Hay production is distributed throughout Missouri. However, there are significant concentrations of counties in the southwest and central parts of the state where hay production exceeds 100,000 tons annually (exhibit 2.1.6-2). These areas of the state also tend to have the greatest concentrations of beef cows.

Exhibit 2.1.6-1 Average Prices Received by Farmers, Missouri, 2003-2007

Commodity 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
All Hay $64.00 $58.50 $65.00 $75.00 $108.00
Alfalfa Hay $106.00$99.00 $102.00$120.00$151.00
All Other Hay$52.00 $45.00 $48.00 $62.00 $88.50
Source: USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service, Agricultural Prices Summary

Exhibit 2.1.6-2 Missouri Hay Production, By County, 2007

Missouri Hay Production Source: USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service

2.1.7 Farm Labor

Farm labor wages in Missouri have risen strongly in recent years, reflecting a national trend. Wages tended to be near national farm labor wage rate averages. In the five-year period, the price of livestock labor in Missouri and Iowa increased from $8.61 per hour to $12.20 an hour. This $3.59 per hour increase equates to a 42% rise in labor costs or growth at an annual compound rate of 7%.

Exhibit 2.1.7-1 Farm Labor and Wage Rates, Missouri and Iowa, 2004-2009

Year & MonthNumber of Hired WorkersHours Worked per Hired WorkerField Hired WorkersLivestock Hired WorkerCombined Hired Workers 1/All Hired Workers Hourly Rate 2/
 (Thousand)  (Dollars per hour)
2004
July 2438.3$8.08$8.61$8.35$8.70
October 2238.4$9.00$9.38$9.16$9.72
2005
January 2135.1$9.16$10.28$10.07$10.63
April 1734.2$8.85$9.27 $9.06 $9.38
July 3140.4$8.86$9.14 $9.05 $9.56
October 2940.4$9.21$10.89$10.02$11.16
2006
January 2536.5$9.61$10.69$10.52$11.50
April 2738.3$8.45$10.38$9.46 $10.12
July 2341.8$9.85$10.15$10.00$10.40
October 2543.1$9.70$10.26$9.95 $10.65
2007
January       
April 2138.8$9.60 $10.46$10.00$10.63
July 2438 $9.44 $11.37$10.40$10.90
October 2341 $10.69$10.90$10.80$11.25
2008
January 2736.8$11.38$10.82$10.90$11.42
April 2138.2$10.65$12.20$11.50$11.88
July 2835.6$10.29$9.23 $9.90 $10.25
October 3237 $10.62$11.37$10.90$11.50
2009
January 2034 $11.06$11.27$11.20$11.40
April 2136.9$10.65$12.20$11.50$11.88
1/ Field and livestock workers combined
2/ Includes supervisory and other types of workers along with the field and livestock workers

Exhibit 2.1.8-2 Cow-Calf Production Costs and Returns per Bred Cow, 2008

 
Item
USDA-ERS Farm Resource Region
United States Heartland Eastern Uplands Prairie Gateway Northern Great Plains Fruitful Rim Basin and Range Mississippi Portal
dollars per bred cow
A
 Gross value of production:  
Steer calves 170.41 201.06 150.65 183.11 174.31 93.91 183.59 144.74
Heifer calves 106.35 135.11 120.32 99.99 108.21 64.81 114.87 123.99
Yearling steers 125.65 45.9 62.6 178.39 149.85 71.93 169 83.52
Yearling heifers 54.98 14.18 27.9 96.05 43.53 28.72 72.66 21.1
Other cattle 100.81 90.94 81.54 105.28 121.97 82.53 102.3 83.8
Total gross value of production 2/ 565.67 492.39 451.49 671.44 605.58 347.96 650.3 464
 
B
 Operating costs:                
Purchased cattle for backgrounding 81.36 29.94 47.45 140.77 45.13 64.36 113.14 45.24
Feed:                
Concentrates and other feed 46.4 45.65 41.42 58.68 38.2 37.91 20.61 37.88
Supplemental feed 40.74 82.69 28.18 14.15 94.22 6.43 5.71 36.65
Harvested forages 204.9 312.14 315.72 159.05 183.72 153.99 197.76 182.01
Cropland pasture 18.05 18.14 4.14 34.85 11.25 3.87 7.52 5.31
Private pasture 123.26 97.79 83.52 110.39 165.2 150.74 134.94 81.86
Public land 3.29 0.5 0.55 1.75 10.28 0.42 3.9 0
Total feed costs 436.64 556.91 473.53 378.87 502.87 353.36 370.44 343.71
Other:                
Veterinary and medicine 27.21 46.99 19.73 24.16 17.93 43.38 21.36 23.82
Bedding and litter 0.5 1.57 0.75 0.05 0.29 0.58 0.91 0.01
Marketing 7.47 5.2 8.48 8.62 7.71 6.06 7.88 6.85
Custom operations 37.93 48.95 32.86 30.3 35.73 66.9 32.07 24.88
Fuel, lube, and electricity 74.95 65.94 55.75 89.14 73.58 71.33 68.83 78.76
Repairs 31.75 35.61 31.5 39.23 25.87 23.89 23.03 26.79
Interest on operating inputs 4.23 4.72 4.01 4.28 4.07 4.22 4.32 3.03
Total operating costs 702.04 795.83 674.06 715.42 713.18 634.08 641.98 553.09
 
C
 Allocated overhead:                
Hired labor 4.44 0.74 4.21 3.49 0.98 21.93 2.01 0.61
Opportunity cost of unpaid labor 289.99 238.31 179.79 221.04 396.18 352.22 485.14 611.22
Capital recovery cost of machinery and equip. 3/ 183.47 377.54 254.45 176.69 115.38 88.99 85.97 281.09
Opportunity cost of land 3.27 7.37 2.95 2.07 4.31 1.28 2.08 3.02
Taxes and insurance 39.32 51.71 38.12 36.26 39.66 36.45 36.44 30.91
General farm overhead 72.47 99.01 64.96 74.2 66.08 63.6 65.84 65.27
Total allocated overhead 592.96 774.68 544.48 513.75 622.59 564.47 677.48 992.12
 
D
 Total costs listed 1,295.00 1,570.51 1,218.54 1,229.17 1,335.77 1,198.55 1,319.46 1,545.21
 
Value of production less total costs listed -729.33 -1,078.12 -767.05 -557.73 -730.19 -850.59 -669.16 -1,081.21
Value of production less operating costs -136.37 -303.44 -222.57 -43.98 -107.6 -286.12 8.32 -89.09
 
E
 Supporting information:                
Bred cows (head) 1/ 83 51 50 78 174 138 170 53
Calves weaned (head) 1/ 71 45 38 66 162 113 152 44
Calving season (percent of ranches) 1/                
One 49 65 19 42 95 46 81 22
Two 13 9 23 14 4 3 6 14
None set 38 26 58 44 1 51 13 64
1/ Developed from survey base year, 1996.
2/ Includes marketing costs below to avoid double counting. Market prices used to update the gross value of production are net of marketing costs.
3/ Machinery and equipment, and housing, manure handling, and feed storage structures, and breeding herd.

2.1.9 Interpretation of the Missouri Costs and Returns Survey

A careful review of the cost and return estimates depicted in exhibit 2.1.8-2 allows one to better understand what drives regional competitiveness in the U.S. cow-calf industry. As depicted on the map in exhibit 2.1.8-1, Missouri breaks into two distinct farm resource regions implying that Missouri cow-calf operations employ two very different management systems.

As a generalization, the farms in Missouri's northern half (Heartland region) have higher investment costs and employ more management input.

Compared to operations in the Heartland region cow-calf operations in southern Missouri (Eastern Uplands region) generally have a lower level of capital invested per cow and employ less management input.

The Heartland region and the Eastern Upland region, which include but are not limited to Missouri, have the smallest average herd sizes compared with other reported regions.

Value of Production (Section A of exhibit 2.1.8-2)
The Eastern Upland region had the second lowest value of production per bred cow of the reported regions in the country. Primarily, this came from having the lowest percentage of calves produced per bred cow.

Operating Costs (Section B of exhibit 2.1.8-2)
The Heartland region had the highest total feed costs of all reported regions in the U.S. This was due mostly to it having the highest cost of harvested forage. The Eastern Upland region had the third highest total feed costs in the reported regions. As with the Heartland region, this was attributable to having the second highest cost of harvested forage of the reported regions.

Overhead Costs (Section C of exhibit 2.1.8-2)
The Heartland region had the second highest total allocated overhead costs per cow of any of the reported regions of the country. This appeared to stem from having the highest machinery and equipment capital recovery costs.

The Eastern Uplands region had the third highest cost for machinery and equipment capital recovery costs in the reported regions but managed to have the second lowest total overhead costs. This was because the Eastern Upland region had the lowest labor costs among all the reported regions.

Small herds typically have high overhead costs per cow. The Heartland and Eastern Uplands regions had the smallest herd sizes among the reported regions

Total Costs (Section D of exhibit 2.1.8-2)
Missouri's diverse natural and human resources combined to create two beef cow production systems with dramatically different costs. Heartland operations had higher costs than any other reported region of the country, whereas the Eastern Upland had the second lowest total costs than any other reported region of the country.

Value of Production Less Total Costs (Section D of exhibit 2.1.8-2)
Deducting the total listed costs from the value of production provides a net basis by which to compare production systems. Missouri's Eastern Upland region ranked as the fifth most profitable reported region in the country. Missouri's Heartland region ranked second to last.

The Heartland region could be described as a system managed for top production, in which overhead costs were allowed to get out of line. In contrast, the Eastern Upland region could be described as a system managed for least cost that did not achieve a level of production sufficient for competitive levels of profitability.

Weaning Percentage (Section E of exhibit 2.1.8-2)
In the Heartland region, the average herd size was 51 bred cows producing 45 weaned calves. Weaning percentage was equal to 88%. In the Eastern Upland region, the average herd size was 50 bred cows, which produced 38 weaned calves. Weaning percentage there was 76%. The Eastern Upland region had the lowest weaning percentage of the reported regions surveyed in the U.S.

Calving Season (Section E of exhibit 2.1.8-2)
In the Heartland region, 65% of the operations had a single calving season, 9% had two calving seasons, and 26% had no set calving season. In the Eastern Uplands region, however, 19% of the operations had one calving season, 23% had two calving seasons, and 58% had no set calving season.

2.1.10 Beef Cow Potential Annual Stocking Rate

Beef cow-calf operations are typically very capital intensive due primarily to land costs. One of the key determinants of investment efficiency is the amount of pastureland needed per cow. Exhibit 2.1.10-1 ranks selected states in terms of the stocking rate per cow. An average potential annual stocking rate for each of these states was determined by dividing the state’s total pastureland by its total beef cow inventory.

Iowa pastures are potentially stocked at an average rate of 3.11 acres per cow per year, earning it the top rank among leading beef states for potential annual stocking rate. Missouri ranks sixth in potential annual stocking rate, with an average of 5.03 acres per cow per year in the state.

Exhibit 2.1.10-1 Potential Annual Stocking Rates for the Top Ten Beef Cow States and Surrounding States of Missouri

State Pastureland, All Types (acres)Beef Cow Inventory (# of head)Total Stocking Rate (acres/cow/year)Rank
Iowa 3,144,321 1,010,000 3.11 1
Illinois 1,461,292 427,000 3.42 2
Tennessee 4,505,286 1,123,000 4.01 3
Arkansas 4,104,248 921,000 4.46 4
Kentucky 5,194,224 1,207,000 4.30 5
Missouri 10,589,412 2,106,000 5.03 6
Florida 5,100,507 950,000 5.37 7
Oklahoma 23,202,109 2,050,000 11.32 8
Kansas 17,544,976 1,500,000 11.70 9
North Dakota 11,344,160 940,000 12.07 10
Nebraska 23,741,780 1,940,000 12.24 11
South Dakota 24,448,108 1,669,000 14.65 12
Texas 100,329,276 5,220,000 19.22 13
Montana 43,459,429 1,382,000 31.45 14

2.1.11 Land Investment per Cow

Average pasture values from USDA were used to derive the typical land investment per cow for selected states. The potential annual average stocking rate multiplied by the average pasture value equals land investment per cow in this analysis.

In exhibit 2.1.11-1, the land investment per cow was estimated for all of the major beef cow states and all of the states neighboring Missouri. North Dakota ranked first, requiring the lowest land investment per cow. This was the result of the state’s moderate potential annual stocking rate and low average pasture cost. Missouri ranked seventh among the states considered. Interestingly, the state with the most cattle, Texas, ranks twelfth amongst the states considered in terms of land investment per cow, due to its relatively low potential annual stocking density and high per acre land cost.

Exhibit 2.1.11-1 Land Investment per Cow for the Top 10 Beef Cow States and Surrounding States of Missouri

State Total Stocking Rate (acres/cow/year)Pasture ValueLand Investment Per CowRank
North Dakota 12.07 $300 $3,621 1
Nebraska 12.24 $430 $5,263 2
Iowa 3.11 $1,800 $5,598 3
South Dakota 14.65 $420 $6,153 4
Illinois 3.42 $2,500 $8,550 5
Kansas 11.7 $740 $8,658 6
Missouri 5.03 $1,820 $9,155 7
Arkansas 4.46 $2,130 $9,500 8
Oklahoma 11.32 $900 $10,188 9
Kentucky 4.3 $2,600 $11,180 10
Tennessee 4.01 $3,850 $15,439 11
Texas 19.22 $1,370 $26,331 12
Montana 31.45 $850 $26,733 13
Florida 5.37 $8,350 $44,840 14

2.2 Missouri Farmland Appreciation

A prime motivation for maintaining a beef herd in Missouri is land appreciation. Beef cows may be seen as a way to pay operating expenses while owning land for appreciation purposes. A prime motivator behind many of the 52,000 beef cow operations in Missouri may be to store and build wealth over time from the compounding annual appreciation on land. Profits from part-time beef cattle operations may be used to pay operating expenses for a farm but long-term compound land appreciation is what justifies the decision to invest family assets into a beef operation. A review of land price appreciation in Missouri during the twentieth century demonstrates the wisdom of that particular investment (exhibit 2.2-1). Although there were times during the century when land prices declined, land values appreciated at a compound rate of about 6% per year over the last 90 years. A 6% compounded return results in land values doubling every 12 years.

Whenever beef cattle producers are challenged about low returns in the cow-calf business, many respond, "farmers live poor and die rich." Land appreciation and the enforced savings from a low profit enterprise may be two key explanations behind this response. Several studies of small business owners have shown that they typically build more wealth over their lives than wage earners. Business owners often set their living expenses lower than their expected earnings to account for the variability in their expected earnings. Over time, this enforced savings builds wealth through long term compounding. Missouri beef cow operations may be a special case of this small business phenomenon where the enforced savings is the capital appreciation on land.

Exhibit 2.2-1 Appreciation of Missouri Farmland this Century

Look-back PeriodPeriod in TimeStarting Value Land Price: $/AcreEnding Value Land Price: $/AcreCompound Annual % Return
10 years1998-2008$1,150 $2,4507.9%
20 years1988-2008$640 $2,4506.9%
30 years1978-2008$641 $2,4504.6%
40 years1968-2008$200 $2,4506.5%
50 years1958-2008$102 $2,4506.6%
60 years1948-2008$60 $2,4506.4%
70 years1938-2008$33 $2,4506.4%
80 years1928-2008$54 $2,4504.9%
90 years1918-2008$66 $2,4504.1%

2.3 Regional Cattle Price Relationships

When comparing average feeder calf prices across the U.S., regional price differentials are clearly evident. While prices vary due to quality and weight differences in the cattle, most regional price differentials reflect transportation cost to major feedlot areas (exhibit 2.3-1). Eighty percent of the cattle on feed in the United States are finished in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado, and Nebraska.

Exhibit 2.3-1 Feeder Steer Prices, 700-800 lbs, Medium and Large Frame #1, 2008

Feeder Steer Prices Source: Livestock Marketing Information Center, Weekly Weighted Average Summaries for Combined Auctions

2.4 Marketing Channels for Cattle

Cattle Moving to Slaughter
The majority of fed cattle moving to slaughter do not go through public markets. The long-term trend toward direct and negotiated purchases of slaughter cattle continues. In 1980, 77.1% of the slaughter steers, heifers, cows, and bulls went through non-public markets. By 2006, this figure was up to 86.7% of the slaughter steers, heifers, cows, and bulls, according to USDA, Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA).

Feeder Cattle
Feeder cattle moving to stocker operations or to feedlots continue to be purchased predominately through livestock markets and other commission sales channels. In 1999, there were 913 livestock markets selling cattle in the U.S. By 2007, the number of livestock markets selling cattle in the U.S. dropped 13% to 798 (exhibit 2.4-1).

Exhibit 2.4-1 Number of Market Agencies Selling on Commission in U.S. and MO

 Year
19992001200320052007
United States913859859809798
Missouri6455535653
Missouri as a % of US7%6%6%7%7%
Source: USDA, Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), Packers and Stockyards Statistical Reports

The number of cattle (all classes) sold on commission in Missouri averaged around 125% of Missouri’s calf crop from 1996 to 2006. This number was higher than the annual calf crop because of the sale of cull cows, the sale of a given animal more than once through the market system, and cattle sold on commission in Missouri that originated in other states. Auction markets have traditionally been the most cost effective way to market feeder calves from a large number of small producers.

Exhibit 2.4-2 Commission Sales in Missouri Compared to Calf Crop

 Year
199620002006
Head Sold on Commission2,735,0002,550,0002,479,000
Calf Crop2,170,0002,060,0001,990,000
Commission Sales as % of Calf Crop126%124%125%
Note: Commission sales include all auctions, terminal markets, video auctions and country commission firms.

Exhibit 2.4-3 Map of Missouri Livestock Markets

Missouri Livestock Markets

2.5 Purebred Industry

Missouri purebred producers are an important part of the U.S. seedstock industry. Exhibit 2.5 1 lists the number of animal registrations per breed in the year 2008 as well as the registration ranking for Missouri. In terms of total breed registrations, Missouri ranks in the top ten in all but one of the major breed associations listed. Missouri ranks in the top five states in total breed registrations for: Angus, Charolais, Gelbvieh, Limousin, Santa Gertrudis, and Salers.

Exhibit 2.5¬-1 Cattle Purebred Registrations for the U.S., 2008

Breed Breed Registrations Missouri Reg. Ranking
Angus 333,766 4th
Charolais 74,030 4th
Hereford 63,943 6th
Simmental 52,748 8th
Red Angus 48,061 9th
Gelbvieh 34,405 2nd
Limousin 28,928 4th
Brangus 21,903 Not available
Shorthorn 15,715 10th
Beefmaster 14,692 Not available
Maine-Anjou 10,203 9th
Brahman 8,500 Not available
Chianina 7,502 19th
Santa Gertrudis 7,500 4th
Salers 6,552 5th
Braunvieh 3,500 Not available
Tarentaise 900 Not available
Source: National Pedigreed Livestock Council and Breed Associations

2.6 Economic Impact of the Missouri Beef Industry

In 2007, cattle were raised on 52,000 of the state's 107,800 farms. Sales of cattle and calves in Missouri generated cash receipts of $1.424 billion, or approximately 19% of the state's total farm cash receipts. As those farm level revenues were spent for goods and services, more than $2.791 billion dollars worth of economic activity was created in the state, primarily in rural areas.

Exhibit 2.6-1 records the distribution of cattle sales by county throughout the state of Missouri during 2007. An estimate of the number of beef cattle sold in each county was derived by prorating the state's cattle sales by county using the 2007 census of agriculture county inventory. Gross income by county for sales of cattle and calves is estimated by taking the state level cash receipts for cattle and calves and using the percentage marketed in each county to derive a county-level cash receipt. Multiplier effects were based on the county-level cash receipts and using IMPLANc social accounting software to simulate these effects for each county and for the state as a whole.

Gross income from cattle sales is spent to purchase agricultural inputs and pay family living expenses in rural communities throughout Missouri. The multiplier effect supports thousands of additional jobs in the state and provides an additional $1.367 million annual impact on Missouri's economy beyond the cash receipts for cattle and calves.

Exhibit 2.6-1 Farm Level Economic Impact of Missouri’s Beef Industry, 2007

 
Percentage of Total Cattle Marketed in Missouri
Estimated Cattle and Calves Marketed in (head)
Estimated Cattle and Calf Receipts
Total Annual Economic Impact
Adair 0.72% 14,154 $10,303,486 $14,146,058
Andrew 0.52% 10,110 $7,359,633 $13,184,525
Atchison 0.37% 7,253 $5,279,737 $8,620,664
Audrain 1.03% 20,219 $14,719,266 $25,529,478
Barry 2.09% 40,966 $29,822,513 $50,341,774
Barton 0.99% 19,340 $14,079,298 $23,982,620
Bates 1.89% 36,922 $26,878,660 $46,918,394
Benton 0.97% 18,901 $13,759,314 $24,009,274
Bollinger 0.75% 14,725 $10,719,466 $19,210,526
Boone 0.71% 13,846 $10,079,497 $13,521,817
Buchanan 0.42% 8,132 $5,919,705 $7,786,046
Butler 0.19% 3,736 $2,719,864 $4,226,672
Caldwell 0.67% 13,187 $9,599,521 $16,833,183
Callaway 1.15% 22,417 $16,319,186 $27,802,051
Camden 0.64% 12,527 $9,119,545 $18,139,596
Cape Girardeau 0.97% 18,989 $13,823,311 $24,164,460
Carroll 0.97% 18,901 $13,759,314 $23,774,031
Carter 0.24% 4,703 $3,423,829 $5,529,947
Cass 1.12% 21,978 $15,999,202 $29,279,340
Cedar 1.20% 23,516 $17,119,146 $31,712,037
Chariton 0.94% 18,461 $13,439,330 $24,353,692
Christian 1.27% 24,835 $18,079,099 $34,389,573
Clark 0.60% 11,648 $8,479,577 $14,745,705
Clay 0.56% 10,989 $7,999,601 $11,622,045
Clinton 0.78% 15,164 $11,039,450 $19,827,315
Cole 0.90% 17,582 $12,799,362 $21,032,692
Cooper 1.08% 21,054 $15,327,236 $23,009,538
Crawford 0.67% 13,099 $9,535,525 $17,891,047
Dade 1.55% 30,241 $22,014,902 $39,733,200
Dallas 1.38% 26,944 $19,615,022 $33,770,771
Daviess 0.74% 14,505 $10,559,473 $18,018,675
DeKalb 0.78% 15,164 $11,039,450 $19,648,840
Dent 0.82% 16,044 $11,679,418 $20,545,287
Douglas 1.29% 25,318 $18,431,081 $32,191,744
Dunklin 0.05% 1,055 $767,962 $979,805
Franklin 1.13% 22,065 $16,063,199 $26,532,501
Gasconade 0.82% 16,044 $11,679,418 $20,979,925
Gentry 0.84% 16,483 $11,999,402 $20,399,943
Greene 1.60% 31,208 $22,718,867 $40,783,320
Grundy 0.51% 9,890 $7,199,641 $9,632,990
Harrison 1.17% 22,857 $16,639,170 $29,910,173
Henry 1.47% 28,659 $20,862,960 $37,560,066
Hickory 0.78% 15,208 $11,071,448 $18,906,036
Holt 0.17% 3,297 $2,399,880 $3,814,951
Howard 0.69% 13,406 $9,759,513 $17,289,222
Howell 2.07% 40,395 $29,406,534 $56,335,773
Iron 0.24% 4,791 $3,487,826 $5,879,756
Jackson 0.34% 6,593 $4,799,761 $6,384,584
Jasper 1.36% 26,593 $19,359,035 $33,517,575
Jefferson 0.31% 6,154 $4,479,777 $7,668,741
Johnson 1.76% 34,373 $25,022,752 $44,250,335
Knox 0.61% 11,868 $8,639,569 $15,198,998
Laclede 1.52% 29,670 $21,598,923 $38,402,993
Lafayette 0.90% 17,626 $12,831,360 $18,198,243
Lawrence 2.25% 43,955 $31,998,404 $56,940,329
Lewis 0.64% 12,527 $9,119,545 $15,480,164
Lincoln 0.57% 11,165 $8,127,595 $14,319,855
Linn 1.25% 24,439 $17,791,113 $33,032,973
Livingston 0.50% 9,758 $7,103,646 $13,142,910
Macon 1.15% 22,417 $16,319,186 $27,609,893
Madison 0.43% 8,351 $6,079,697 $11,064,763
Maries 1.04% 20,439 $14,879,258 $25,619,151
Marion 0.54% 10,549 $7,679,617 $13,038,915
McDonald 1.11% 21,758 $15,839,210 $26,720,542
Mercer 0.62% 12,088 $8,799,561 $15,498,034
Miller 1.24% 24,175 $17,599,122 $30,660,188
Mississippi 0.05% 1,055 $767,962 $1,010,903
Moniteau 1.45% 28,351 $20,638,971 $28,791,488
Monroe 0.87% 16,923 $12,319,386 $20,505,655
Montgomery 0.49% 9,670 $7,039,649 $11,506,510
Morgan 1.11% 21,758 $15,839,210 $27,728,216
New Madrid 0.03% 615 $447,978 $735,162
Newton 1.67% 32,747 $23,838,811 $41,860,357
Nodaway 1.37% 26,813 $19,519,027 $34,221,948
Oregon 1.15% 22,417 $16,319,186 $28,256,508
Osage 1.58% 30,900 $22,494,878 $38,334,310
Ozark 1.24% 24,175 $17,599,122 $29,998,039
Pemiscot 0.01% 220 $159,992 $204,126
Perry 0.87% 17,055 $12,415,381 $21,591,452
Pettis 1.36% 26,593 $19,359,035 $34,006,177
Phelps 0.69% 13,406 $9,759,513 $18,048,766
Pike 0.92% 18,022 $13,119,346 $22,890,910
Platte 0.45% 8,791 $6,399,681 $10,601,763
Polk 2.40% 46,988 $34,206,294 $61,121,859
Pulaski 0.58% 11,428 $8,319,585 $13,832,059
Putnam 1.19% 23,296 $16,959,154 $29,161,385
Ralls 0.46% 9,011 $6,559,673 $8,587,281
Randolph 0.65% 12,747 $9,279,537 $17,004,344
Ray 0.80% 15,604 $11,359,434 $20,563,630
Reynolds 0.28% 5,494 $3,999,801 $6,901,068
Ripley 0.44% 8,571 $6,239,689 $10,835,288
Saline 0.78% 15,164 $11,039,450 $13,646,692
Schuyler 0.52% 10,110 $7,359,633 $12,989,951
Scotland 0.56% 10,989 $7,999,601 $13,936,385
Scott 0.20% 3,956 $2,879,856 $4,291,908
Shannon 0.46% 9,011 $6,559,673 $9,979,716
Shelby 0.63% 12,307 $8,959,553 $15,845,740
St Charles 0.19% 3,736 $2,719,864 $3,584,575
St Clair 1.16% 22,637 $16,479,178 $28,873,531
St Francois 0.51% 9,890 $7,199,641 $11,430,755
St Louis 0.03% 615 $447,978 $585,430
Ste Genevieve 0.63% 12,307 $8,959,553 $15,595,841
Stoddard 0.40% 7,736 $5,631,719 $9,242,040
Stone 0.61% 11,868 $8,639,569 $15,195,404
Sullivan 1.44% 28,131 $20,478,979 $29,090,308
Taney 0.49% 9,670 $7,039,649 $12,011,359
Texas 2.08% 40,658 $29,598,524 $53,093,241
Vernon 1.40% 27,472 $19,999,003 $37,155,027
Warren 0.29% 5,626 $4,095,796 $7,070,695
Washington 0.45% 8,835 $6,431,679 $11,444,504
Wayne 0.33% 6,373 $4,639,769 $7,608,372
Webster 1.87% 36,615 $26,654,671 $47,567,713
Worth 0.48% 9,450 $6,879,657 $11,638,852
Wright 1.78% 34,768 $25,310,738 $44,346,539
State Total 100.00% 1,956,000 $1,423,929,000 $2,449,770,043
 
Missouri as a whole $1,423,929,000 $2,791,404,911
Additional economic impact for the state not directly attributable to a county (difference between state economic impact and sum of county level impacts) $341,634,868
Source: USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service and IMPLAN multipliers

Back to Report