Farmers, Manufacturers Negotiate Gray Zone Of Digital World

By Jim Patrico
Progressive Farmer Senior Editor

Plattsburg, Mo. (DTN) – You bought it; you should be able to work on it. Sure, but in these digital days there is a big exception to your right to repair. Many things you buy, including farm equipment, depend on software to function. That embedded code in your cellphone, automobile and tractor doesn’t really belong to you. The purchase agreement you signed likely specifies that you only bought a license to use the software in your new equipment. You don’t own the code and you don’t have the right to repair it or modify it to suit your needs.
In our largely computerized world, that license agreement is a gray zone that society as a whole – and farmers in particular – are starting to explore.
It rankles some farmers that the gray zone means they must have a dealer help with some repairs.
“Farmers take a lot of pride in their shops and in fixing their equipment. This hits home,” Danny Kluthe, a Dodge, Nebraska, farmer told DTN/The Progressive Farmer.
The federal government has inhabited this gray area since at least as far back as 1996 when Congress passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The law was meant to protect the rights of software innovators and is reviewed and updated periodically.
Recently, states have made forays into the gray zone. As many as 11 state legislatures have discussed Right to Repair laws. Some of the proposed laws – like those in Kansas and Wyoming – are specific to agriculture. But most of the proposed laws tackle a basic question facing manufacturers and consumers of all sorts: Do owners of a product powered by software have the right to access and modify the copyrighted embedded code in the product?
State Sen. Lydia Brasch, who farms with her husband Lee in Bancroft, Nebraska, thinks consumers do have a right to that software. This winter, she introduced Nebraska’s version of a Right to Repair law. The bill (LB67) would require original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) to make available to customers and third-party repair services all the tools dealers possess. This includes software.
Brasch said she introduced LB67 in part because she saw her husband become frustrated with a combine repair he could not make on his own. Instead, he had to rely on his dealer, who was swamped with other harvest repair issues at the time and was slow to come to the farm.
“I love our dealership,” Sen. Brasch said. “They are nice people who treat us right. But I don’t want them to say, ‘You have to come to us. You can’t go to anyone else.’”
Kluthe agrees and he drove to the state capitol to testify in favor of LB67. “Time is valuable,” he said. “We can’t sit in the field and wait for a company guy to come out [to make repairs]... Our hands are tied.”
TWO SIDES
Industry representatives understand the problem. But they say there is a basic misperception about repairs and software.
“John Deere supports an owner’s right to repair his equipment. Period,” said Chuck Studer, director of industry relations for the ag and turf division of John Deere. “But we need to remember that 95%-98% of potential repairs on farm equipment don’t require software at all.
“In those rare cases where it [a repair] does require a software update or a software replacement... we make a new copy of that software available to the customer through the dealer at no cost to the customer.” There likely will be labor charges from the dealer, Studer said.
Deere and other OEMs understand the Right to Repair movement could strain relationships with some customers. And it is worrisome. “Our legacy and our reputation are driven by our commitment to deliver superior products and customer service,” Studer said. “If we don’t deliver that experience – not just for the first owner but for second, third or fourth owner – our brand value is at risk.”
To address the issue, OEMs have adopted new strategies they hope will help ease concerns about digital repairs. Deere, for instance, offers customers the option to use telematics systems that alert a dealer to a piece of equipment’s condition. If repairs will be needed soon or are necessary now, a dealer’s repair truck can be on the road quickly with the right parts to fix the problem before it causes delays.
To make repairs transparent, Deere offers online technical, diagnostic, parts and operator manuals, Studer said. In newer Deere models, in-cab monitors display problem codes. The owner can look up the code in the manual and make most necessary repairs.
Software, of course, is another matter. If an original version becomes corrupted, Deere will replace it. But if someone wants to change an embedded code for some reason: “We don’t feel that modifying embedded code is the right solution for our customers. We think it injects too many risks and we don’t think it is needed,” Studer said.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Safety is one reason OEMs don’t want unauthorized people to have unfettered access to embedded codes.
Today’s farm equipment is tremendously complicated; everything runs through a vehicle’s computer brains. For example, steering systems today often have no mechanical connections between the front wheels and the steering wheel. It’s all controlled by software. The same is true for braking systems and transmissions. Modify the software, and unintended consequences could be deadly. Emissions are also controlled by embedded code. Modify it, and machines could fallout of compliance with the law.
“Deere supports an owner’s right to repair their equipment. However, modifying or reverse engineering the embedded software is viewed separate from this because of the risks it poses to operators, bystanders, dealers, mechanics and customers,” Studer said.
Brasch, who in addition to her work as a state senator also is a software consultant, disagrees. “When you buy something, it’s yours. You should be able to maintain it, diagnosis it and repair it. But with today’s [software] technology – which runs through everything, which we love and we curse – we are not given that ability to repair or maintain because they [manufacturers] are keepers of the keys.”
A WAY FORWARD?
The automobile manufacturers and repair providers are facing similar Right to Repair versus intellectual property rights challenges. Four major industry groups, including Global Automakers, in 2014 signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that might point a way forward for other industries, including the farm equipment sector.
The MOU protects OEMs’ intellectual property rights, but states manufacturers “will make available for purchase by owners and independent repair facilities all diagnostic repair tools incorporating the same diagnostic, repair and wireless capabilities that such manufacturer makes available to its dealers.”
Although it does not mention software or embedded code, the MOU does put new repair tools in the hands of non-dealers. That could go a long way to granting owners the repair abilities some now feel they lack.
In this scenario, if software goes bad, a repair shop can diagnose the problem and order a replacement code just as it now can order any part to make a repair. But owners and repair shops can’t rewrite or modify the code.
Although Deere is not a signatory to the automotive MOU, Studer said it agrees with the general idea: “We truly do support customers’ right to repair their equipment.”
Still, he adds, the company opposes LB67 and legislation like it because the company “doesn’t think that legislative action is the best solution. It can have unintended consequences. Let the marketplace provide a more perfect answer.”
Brasch, meanwhile, stands by her bill, in part because the issue of the Right to Repair in the digital age is so broad: “It’s beyond tractors. On farms we do not live on an island, we are part of the world economy.”
LB67 and the automotive MOU are part of a marketplace versus legislation debate that is just now forming. For farmers and machinery manufacturers, “this is part of a long conversation that the industry needs to go through,” Studer said. “It is dependent on all the parties being transparent and communicating well.”

USDA Delays Livestock Marketing Rule

By Chris Clayton
DTN Ag Policy Editor

Washington (DTN) – A livestock marketing rule put forward by the Obama administration near the end of last year will be delayed at least six months, giving President Donald Trump’s nominee for Agriculture secretary, Sonny Perdue, the final say on whether the rule will eventually go into effect or not.
USDA’s Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration announced the delay of the controversial rule on April 11, stating that the effective date would be extended until Oct. 19. Additionally, USDA announced the department would ask for further public comment on four possible actions should USDA choose to eliminate the interim final rule over how federal courts should interpret a provision of the 1921 Packers and Stockyards Act.
Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, praised the decision, noting he has been fighting USDA over the proposed livestock rules since they were first introduced in 2010.
“I commend USDA for extending the effective date of this disastrous rule. This extension will allow for the incoming secretary of Agriculture to fully analyze the effects of the rule and consider the recently submitted public comments,” Roberts said.
The interim final rule addresses how USDA wants federal courts to interpret a provision of the 1921 Packers and Stockyards Act. Federal courts have repeated rules in cases between poultry growers and poultry companies that a grower must demonstrate a company’s negative action toward an individual producer harmed competition in the entire poultry market. Since the 1980s, USDA has used the standard in cases involving beef and pork producers that the livestock producers does not have to show such harm to competition to bring a Packers and Stockyards case against a meatpacker. USDA has repeatedly argued the same language should apply to poultry contracts as well.
The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and National Chicken Council also applauded USDA’s decision. NCBA stated the group looked forward to the rules’ final demise.
“This is another step toward common sense and away from counter-productive government intrusion in the free market,” said Craig Uden, president of NCBA. “That said, while a delay is welcome, ultimately this rule should be killed and American cattle producers should be free to market our beef without the threat of government-sanctioned frivolous lawsuits.”
The Organization for Competitive Markets and National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition criticized USDA for delaying the rule and called the department’s decision “anti-farmer.” The groups said the interim final rule would help level the playing field for family farmers and ensure they have some recourse when their rights under the law are violated.
“USDA needs to stop playing games at the expense of the American family farmer,” said Mike Weaver, president of the Organization for Competitive Markets. “This will be the third time USDA has asked for comments on this rule. Every time family farmers comment in favor of the rule, USDA delays and opens a new comment period. It’s obvious USDA has a deaf ear to America’s family farmers. We call on America’s consumers to join family farmers in demanding USDA finally enact this rule.”
The livestock rules came from language in the 2008 farm bill and immediately became controversial after USDA made its first proposed rules in 2010. The rules were blocked by Congress refusing to fund any effort to advance them. Last year, Congress relented in the fiscal year 2016 funding bill. USDA began advancing the rules shortly after.
USDA’s action on the interim final rule did not address the status of two proposed rules dealing with poultry markets and marketing contracts. Those proposals are not as far along in the rulemaking process as the interim final rule.
One proposed rule would give producers more rights when dealing with marketing contracts. The rule would ensure packers cannot retaliate against producers who show their contracts to legal counsel. The rule also would prevent a packer from giving undue price preferences in those marketing contracts. The proposed rule has been opposed by packers that increasingly buy livestock through such contracts. Livestock groups such as NCBA and NPPC argue this rule would lead to packers ending contracts that offer specific premiums to producers.
The second proposed rule would restructure the tournament payment system used in the poultry industry by giving USDA authority to determine if a ranking system for poultry growers is fair or unjustly discriminatory, or deceptive. The poultry industry has opposed any USDA rules that could create problems with the company tournament systems.
More details can be found at https://gipsa.usda.gov/psp/farmerfairpractices.aspx.

Infrastructure Plan In Works

By Jerry Hagstrom
DTN Political Correspondent

Washington (DTN) – The White House is still working on its infrastructure proposal, but a special assistant to the president sees the plan as a potential major boost in job creation and bipartisanship.
D.J. Gribbin, the special assistant to President Donald Trump on infrastructure, spoke recently at a forum sponsored by the Wall Street Journal. Gribbin and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel did not focus on rural needs, but the conversation did offer some insights into how an infrastructure bill might develop.
Gribbin said the timing of the Trump administration’s infrastructure proposal is “still up in the air,” but he noted, “Infrastructure is one of the most important and popular things we are doing right now” because it is both bipartisan and a federal, state and local initiative.
Emanuel, who was President Barack Obama’s first White House chief of staff, said that infrastructure is “not a one-trick pony” and that there are many elements to it and many methods of financing. There is a place for public-private partnerships, Emanuel said, but such partnerships cannot be used for everything.
“You need new revenue,” he said, adding that he favors increasing the gas tax.
Building roads and schools in Iraq and Afghanistan were not done with tax credits, he noted.
Gribbin and Emanuel seemed to agree that the American public will support some form of taxation or fees to pay for infrastructure if they know what they are getting.
“The problem is we have created concern about where money is going,” Gribbin said. He noted that the “bridge to nowhere” fight a few years ago was an example of people being afraid to send their money to Washington. That project in Alaska was part of a 2006 highway bill, but eventually ended up being canceled in 2015 after years of controversy.
Emanuel said he would segregate the funding, perhaps putting it in a trust fund. Emanuel added that the fiscally conservative wing of the Republican Party might support infrastructure if there are projects in House members’ districts. Even if there is a pull-back in environmental regulations, he said, if there are apprenticeships for minorities, “Democrats will be open to it.”
Emanuel said that the environmental regulation process should be speeded up, but he urged Gribbin to keep the focus on the projects, not on an ideological campaign to override environmental regulation.
“We can be sensible about environmental policy without losing environment quality,” said Emanuel, who has undertaken a wide variety of infrastructure modernization projects in Chicago.
Gribbin, who previously worked in the private sector on the financing of public-private partnerships, said he is taking “a big view of what infrastructure is” including roads, highways, veterans projects, air traffic control and housing.
One of his major goals, he said, is to work across agency lines.
“I think there is a benefit of thinking that way. We are very fragmented in the federal government,” he said.
In an interview with the New York Times, Trump said he believes the infrastructure plan would get tremendous support from Democrats, as well as good support from Republicans. The president is still looking at $1 trillion in investment, he said.
“We may take that trillion, and we may also in addition use public/private. But we’re talking about an investment of a trillion dollars,” Trump said. He added, “On roads, on bridges, on many different things. And it’s also going to be – we have to refurbish to a large extent. You know, we can build new highways, which are much more expensive.”

OBITUARY

T. V. “Tommy” Jones, 80, of Cheyenne passed on April 17, 2017 in Cheyenne. T. V. was born October 5, 1936 in Crawford, NE to Vernon and Doris Jones. He was raised on the family ranch northof Henry, NE on Sheep Creek in the Hereford business. He attended country school until high school andgraduated from Torrington High School in 1954. He attended the University of Wyoming for two years and thenmoved to California and became a DJ on KCBQ in San Diego.

He returned to the University of Wyoming and graduated in 1956. He then worked for the Wyoming StockmanFarmer until he went to work for Harry Green at the “the Record Stockman” in Denver as a field man.

He met April Belecky in 1961 when he was announcing the chuck wagon races His famous phrase, “Thunder FromThe North” was heard for over 20 years at the Cheyenne Frontier Days night shows. They were married in 1962. Hewas a PRCA Gold Card Member, a Shriner and a Mason. He also was a member of the Heels.

He was a joint owner of the Thomas & Jones Sales Management for cattle sales with Ted Thomas.

He was a member of St. Andrews Episcopal Ministry Church, a member of the Kappa Sigma Fraternity, the CowboyJoe Club at the University of Wyoming and the Alumni Associationat the University of Wyoming. ​

He was a world traveler and a great story teller. He never forgot a name or a face and he never met astranger. He traveled all over the United States for cattle sales. He enjoyed the outdoors and liked hunting butloved fishing.

He is survived by his wife of 54 years – April, son Cotton Jones and wife Kris, granddaughters Lyndsay and Brandi,great granddaughter Aubrianna, step grandsons, Scott Beville and Trey Stetter, 2 brothers Jon & wife Janet, Barry& wife Sharon. He was preceded in death by his parents and daughter Codi Lee Bocanegra.

Private family services will be held. A Celebration of Life reception will be held at the Old West MuseumWednesday April 26 at 12:30. His friends are invited to come with stories to share.​ (The T. V. stands for Thomas Vernon)

Donations may be made to the Shriners Hospital for Children, Salt Lake City, UT, Cheyenne Frontier DaysScholarship Fund, Cheyenne Frontier Days Old West Museum, St. Andrews Episcopal Ministry Church, Cheyenneor do something nice for somebody.

Direct Receipts

Direct Receipts: 80,800

Texas 41,400. 97 pct over 600 lbs. 38 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 650 lbs 144.76; 725-740 lbs 139.99; 750-775 lbs 135.89; 800-825 lbs 134.20; 850-875 lbs 126.78; Del Current 750-775 lbs 135.00; 800-825 lbs 135.67; 850-880 lbs 132.36; FOB May 650-675 lbs 143.42; 725 lbs 139.00; FOB June 700-725 lbs 138.80; 750 lbs 137.50; 800-725 lbs 132.06; FOB July 700-725 lbs 139.65; 750-775 lbs 136.98; 800 lbs 131.00; FOB Aug 675 lbs 140.50; 725 lbs 141.00; 750 lbs 136.50; Del May 775 lbs 136.50; 800-825 lbs 132.22; Del June 700 lbs 143.75; 750 lbs 135.25; Del July 700 lbs 141.30; 775 lbs 137.60; 825 lbs 138.07; Del Aug 750 lbs 136.50; 800-825 lbs 136.86; Del Sept 700 lbs 143.65; Del Oct 775 lbs 136.40. Medium and Large 1-2 FOB Current 575 lbs 153.50; 625 lbs 145.93;650-690 lbs 140.47; 740-745 lbs 133.73; 750-775 lbs 132.21; 800 lbs 128.84; 900 lbs 117.00; Del Current 620 lbs 155.00; 690 lbs 146.00; 720-745 lbs 141.36; 750-800 lbs 140.90; 800 lbs 136.48; 860 lbs 132.00; FOB May 750 lbs 135.72; 800-825 lbs 131.68; 875 lbs 122.75; FOB June 500 lbs 141.25; 700 lbs 137.10; 825 lbs 129.38; FOB July-Aug 775 lbs 131.50; FOB Aug 700 lbs 131.50; Del 800 lbs 136.00; Del Sep 850 lbs 130.00; Del Oct 850 lbs 130.00. Heifers Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 650 lbs 135.00; 700-735 lbs 130.48; 750-775 lbs 126.51; Del Current 650-690 lbs 134.67; 725 129.80; FOB May 600 lbs 135.00; 650 lbs 137.15; 100 lbs 129.60; 750 lbs 126.50; FOB June 700-725 lbs 130.71; 750-770 lbs 127.27; FOB July 650-680 lbs 132.86; 700-725 lbs 132.47; FOB Aug 700-725 lbs 130.81; FOB Sept 675 lbs 132.95; Del May 725 lbs 127.50; 760 lbs 127.24; Del June 600 lbs 139.62; 650 lbs 137.93; 725 lbs 130.37; 750 lbs 127.00; Del July 650 lbs 136.30; 700-725 lbs 133.39; 750 lbs 127.00; Del Aug 725 lbs 134.51; Del Sept 575 lbs 145.65; 675 lbs 138.00; 700 lbs 132.65; Del Oct 675 lbs 135.00; Del Nov 700 lbs 132.75. Medium and Large 1-2 FOB Current 650-660 lbs 130.06; 700 lbs 133.95; 750-770 lbs 128.19; Del Current 590 lbs 146.50; 660-690 lbs 135.78; 700730 lbs 132.36; 760 lbs 135.00; Del June 650 lbs 135.00; 700 lbs 133.50.

Oklahoma 9200. 98 pct over 600 lbs. 42 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 725 lbs 139.84; 800-850 lbs 134.77; 850-880 lbs 131.11; 900 lbs 126.77; Del Current 875 lbs 131.00; FOB May 725 140.00; 750 lbs 138.91; 800 lbs 134.64; June 700 lbs 140.25; July 775 lbs 140.91; 825 lbs 133.85; Aug 800 lbs 134.45; Sept 700 lbs 140.15. Medium and Large 1-2 FOB Current 800 lbs 131.52; May 725 lbs 131.41; July 725 lbs 134.00. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 650 lbs 132.29; 725 lbs 131.41; 760 lbs 126.68; Apr 775 lbs 126.98; May 725 lbs 131.41; June 650 lbs 133.75; Sept 575 lbs 142.65; 675 lbs 133.50; 700 lbs 129.28; Oct 675 lbs 133.50 Nov 700 lbs 129.25. Medium and Large 1-2 FOB Current 840 lbs 119.95.

Kansas 9100. 99 pct over 600 lbs. 46 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 830-835 lbs 135.08; 850-875 lbs 129.56; 935 lbs 123.00; FOB Aug 800 lbs 137.25; Del Current 725 lbs 141.50; 775 lbs 134.58; 800-825 lbs 134.37; 850 lbs 134.00; Del May 725 142.50; 750 lbs 140.00; 800 lbs 137.83; Del July 775 lbs 142.00. Medium and Large 1-2 Del Current 725-743 lbs 137.68; 750-775 lbs 136.03; 800-825 lbs 133.54; Del May 725 lbs 132.50; Del June 700 lbs 141.00; 825 lbs 133.50; Del July 725 lbs 137.00; Del July-Aug 775 lbs 135.00; Del Aug 700 lbs 136.00. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 725 lbs 133.00; 750-775 lbs 128.48; Del Current 570 lbs 151.35; 650 lbs 134.00; 700 lbs 131.00; 760-775 lbs 129.45; Del May 725 lbs 132.50.

National Feeder Cattle Summary

St. Joseph, MO — April 14
National feeder cattle receipts: 194,900

Feeder steers and heifers sold $3-8 higher, with instances $9-10 higher. Feeder steers and heifers in the southeast traded $2-5 higher. Trade was active on good to very good demand for all classes. The feeder market rebounded from last week’s lower trade with the possibility of China lifting the ban on U.S. beef causing speculation early in the week, however, it was made official which lend support. In some parts of the north, backgrounded feeders that were carrying extra flesh saw minimal discounts as buyers were looking for good quality cattle. In other areas, discounts were steep and customers were more selective on quality. The Northern Plains, where some of the best cattle reside, continue to report the highest feeder prices. In Bassett, NE two loads of steers averaging 701 lbs brought $156.25. Ogallala, NE sold over 200 head of steers averaging 670 lbs at $173.55 and 279 head of steers averaging 821 lbs at $146.27. Throughout most of the week live and feeder cattle futures had a whole new attitude, posting triple digit gains on the nearby and through the summer month contracts, which provided leverage to trade. The April live cattle has been gaining a lot of ground inching closer to the cash slaughter market. For the week, live cattle contracts for April gained 5.32 closing at $125.37, and April feeders were up 4.05 at $137.80 as compared to April 7 close. USDA is projecting U.S. beef exports to expand by 6.9 percent in 2017 and pork exports are forecasted to increase 8.4 percent. Beef production is forecasted to grow 5 percent. The best news is on imports as they are estimated to decline by 9 percent on beef and 4.3 percent on pork. The warmer weather and much needed rain received across the Plains and Midwest spurred renewed interest for grazing calves. The break in moisture and plenty of sunshine have fueled pasture growth and demand. However, thunderstorms are expected later in the week in the mid-section of the U.S. Cattle grazers are feeling very optimistic about the market as all indicators are showing positive signs. There was not much action seen on the FED Cattle Exchange on April 12 as consignors passed on bids. Only 120 head of steers were sold at $126 out of over 5000 head on offer. Consignors felt confident in waiting it out in hopes of receiving higher prices. Those hopes did come to life when feedlot trade broke on April 13 in the Southern Plains with live sales trading $2 higher than last week at $128. In Nebraska trade and demand was moderate. Compared to the previous week, dressed sales sold mostly $6-7 higher from $206-208, mostly $206-207, with some sales having greater than a two week delivery. Live sales in Nebraska were $2-8 higher from $128-130 and in Colorado a few live sale traded from $128-130.

Texas 6300. 70 pct over 600 lbs. 66 pct heifers. Steer: Medium and Large 1 250-300 lbs (208.08) 300-350 lbs (320) 191.76; 350-400 lbs (389) 187.41; 450-500 lbs (480) 170.27; 500-550 lbs (526) 168.78; 550-600 lbs (569 )158.33; 600-650 lbs (625) 151.15; 650-700 lbs (730) 142.77; 750-800 lbs (778) 138.54; 800-850 lbs (826) 133.25; 850-900 lbs (884) 130.43; 900-950 lbs (929) 125.02. Medium and Large 1-2 450-500 lbs (469) 169.34; 500-550 lbs (521) 153.22; 550-600 lbs (573) 149.95; 600-650 lbs (627) 139.29; 650-700 lbs (680) 136.67; 700-750 lbs (718) 131.49; 750-800 lbs (776) 135.11; 800-850 lbs (831) 134.00; 850-900 lbs (880) 127.39; 900-950 lbs (909) 121.51. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs(319) 174.48; 350-400 lbs (392) 156.92; 400-450 lbs (415) 159.99; 450-500 lbs (521) 141.19; 550-600 lbs (572) 136.51; 600-650 lbs (621) 140.85; 650-700 lbs (672) 135.04; 700-750 lbs (737) 129.26; 750-800 lbs (764) 124.80; 800-850 lbs (816) 119.67; 850-900 lbs (878) 117.10. Medium and Large 1-2 250-300 lbs (254) 174.52; 300-350 lbs (316) 350-400 lbs (379) 151.55; 400-450 lbs (424) 149.15; 450-500 lbs (455) 143.34; 500-550 lbs (520) 132.74; 550-600 lbs (584) 132.67; 650-700 lbs (682) 127.37; 700-750 lbs (734) 126.01; 750-800 lbs (767) 125.97; 800-850 lbs (831) 114.62.

Oklahoma 37,700. 69 pct over 600 lbs. 39 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (327) 198.50; 350-400 lbs (372) 180.79; 400-450 lbs (428) 182.17; 450-500 lbs (476) 172.54; 500-550 lbs (167.22); 550-600 lbs (575) 161.30; 600-650 lbs (619) 155.68; 650-700 lbs (681) 147.18; 700-750 lbs (729) 142.39; 750-800 lbs (778) 137.01; 800-850 lbs (825) 133.46; 850-900 lbs (872) 129.64; 900-950 lbs (924) 127.43; 950-1000 lbs (969) 125.66; 1000-1050 lbs (1011) 124.78; 1050-1100 lbs (1068) 122.55. Medium and Large 1-2 load 295 lbs 180.00; 300-350 lbs (329) 185.93; 350-400 lbs (370) 181.56; 400-450 lbs (426) 169.56; 450-500 lbs (475) 164.41; 500-550 lbs (528) 161.21; 550-600 lbs (584) 151.40; 600-650 lbs (627) 146.67; 650-700 lbs (669) 143.03; 700-750 lbs (726) 137.16; 750-800 lbs (779) 131.64; 800-850 lbs (819) 129.74; 850-900 lbs (873) 127.38; 900-950 lbs (919) 125.85; 950-1000 lbs (967) 123.22. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (329) 166.19; 350-400 lbs (369) 161.60; 400-450 lbs (424) 157.72; 450-500 lbs (467) 154.16; 500-550 lbs (525) 147.01; 550-600 lbs (575) 141.95; 600-650 lbs (626) 139.15; 650-700 lbs (674) 134.95; 700-750 lbs (724) 132.44; 750-800 lbs (775) 127.51; 800-850 lbs (826) 124.42; 850-900 lbs (865) 123.35; 900-950 lbs (912) 119.76; 950-1000 lbs (976) 117.76; 1000-1050 lbs (1010) 118.81. Medium and Large 1-2 load 250 lbs 175.00; 300-350 lbs (328) 154.54; 350-400 lbs (383) 149.61; 400-450 lbs (425) 151.61; 450-500 lbs (473) 144.47; 500-550 lbs (526) 114.29; 550-600 lbs (576) 136.57; 600-650 lbs (628) 133.37; 650-700 lbs (681) 133.07; 750-800 lbs (786) 125.64; 800-850 lbs (829) 123.59; 850-900 lbs (864) 120.65.

New Mexico 3400. 39 pct over 600 lbs. 48 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 500-550 lbs (532) 164.47; 550-600 lbs (574) 155.14; 600-650 lbs (634) 148.64; 700-750 lbs (733) 138.27; 750-800 lbs (793) 136.57; 900-950 lbs (919) 126.62. Medium and Large 1-2 400-450 lbs (428) 184.58; 450-500 lbs (477) 170.38; 500-550 lbs (524) 164.02; 550-600 lbs (576) 149.66; 600-650 lbs (629) 147.35; 650-700 lbs (672) 142.06; 700-750 lbs (728) 139.52; 750-800 lbs (782) 124.62; 800-850 lbs (804) 136.52. Heifers Medium and Large 1 400-450 lbs (424) 164.86; 450-500 lbs (464) 150.41; 500-550 lbs (529) 146.55; 550-600 lbs (572) 131.72; 600-650 lbs (622) 132.09; 650-700 lbs (685) 127.56. Medium and Large 12 400-450 lbs (429) 159.23; 450-500 lbs (469) 157.86; 500-550 lbs (523) 145.35; 550-600 lbs (573) 138.01; 650-700 lbs (689) 121.88.

Kansas 14,900. 79 pct over 600 lbs. 74 pct heifers. Steers: Large 1 1050-1100 lbs (1055) 124.58. Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (324) 186.02; 350-400 lbs (370) 186.53; 400-450 lbs (426) 182.66; 450-500 lbs (478) 178.82; 500-550 lbs (525) 168.65; 550-600 lbs (561) 168.16; 600-650 lbs (622) 161.17; 650-700 lbs (672) 157.27; 700-750 lbs (729) 153.10; 750-800 lbs (771) 140.86; 800-850 lbs (830) 138.11; 850-900 lbs (871) 134.25; 900-950 lbs (913) 133.65; 950-1000 lbs (966) 129.67. Medium and Large 1-2 300-350 lbs (323) 174.72; 350-400 lbs (383) 172.54; 400-450 lbs (430) 173.18; 450-500 lbs (472) 170.37; 500-550 lbs (535) 164.41; 550-600 lbs (579) 158.62; 600-650 lbs (629) 156.25; 650-700 lbs (673) 147.39; 700-750 lbs (731) 139.65; 750-800 lbs (770) 135.73; 800-850 lbs (832) 132.91; 850-900 lbs (883) 129.61; 900-950 lbs (934) 128.45; 950-1000 lbs (984) 123.25. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 350-300 lbs (282) 171.08; 300-350 lbs (337) 165.12; 350-400 lbs (382) 157.78; 400-450 lbs (433) 157.77; 450-500 lbs (471) 152.12; 500-550 lbs (528) 148.30; 550-600 lbs (570) 144.15; 600-650 lbs (630) 141.77; 650-700 lbs (677) 137.13; 700-750 lbs (729) 133.43; 750-800 lbs (774) 129.68; 800-850 lbs (824) 126.53; 850-900 lbs (871) 124.31; 900-950 lbs (936) 122.94. Medium and Large 1-2 350-400 lbs (367) 147.50; 400-450 lbs (434) 149.96; 450-500 lbs (486) 148.36; 500-550 lbs (527) 139.91; 550-600 lbs (569) 135.06; 600-650 lbs (624) 135.78; 650-700 lbs (690) 132.20; 750-800 lbs (787) 127.17; 800-850 lbs (830) 123.64.

Missouri 36,800. 40 pct over 600 lbs. 45 pct heifers. Steers: Large 1 500-550 lbs (515) 159.97; 950-1000 lbs (958) 120.28. Medium and Large 1 350-300 lbs (277) 182.42; 300-350 lbs (328) 185.05; 350-400 lbs (376) 181.09; 400-450 lbs (426) 180.31; 450-500 lbs (478) 175.93; 500-550 lbs (524) 169.85; 550-600 lbs (570) 162.41; 600-650 lbs (624) 154.47; 650-700 lbs (671) 147.93; 750-800 lbs (765) 137.49; 800-850 lbs (823) 131.67; 850-900 lbs (975) 132.31; 900-950 lbs (922) 125.98; 950-1000 lbs (966) 120.91. Medium and Large 1-2 300-350 lbs (324) 175.11; 350-400 lbs (374) 169.58; 400-450 lbs (426) 163.85; 450-500 lbs (477) 159.86; 500-550 lbs (526) 159.65; 550-600 lbs (577) 150.84; 600-650 lbs (629) 147.86; 650-700 lbs (975) 141.13; 700-750 lbs (727) 136.08; 750-800 lbs (777) 131.33; 800-850 lbs (829) 129.37; 850-900 lbs (865) 127.41. Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (330) 161.87; 350-400 lbs (376) 159.83; 400-450 lbs (423) 155.74; 450-500 lbs (473) 147.78; 500-550 lbs (574) 138.25; 550-600 lbs (574) 138.25; 600-650 lbs (625) 136.41; 700-750 lbs (724) 129.66; 750-800 lbs (770) 125.61; 950-1000 lbs (979) 106.61. Medium and Large 1-2 350-300 lbs (278) 152.73; 300-350 lbs (330) 154.96; 350-400 lbs (377) 148.14; 400-450 lbs (421) 144.47; 450-500 lbs (476) 141.03; 500-550 lbs (526) 135.37; 550-600 lbs (573) 133.29; 650-700 lbs (375) 126.86; 750-800 lbs (765) 124.96; 800-850 lbs (823) 116.09; 850-900 lbs (874) 119.00.

Arkansas 9700. 26 pct over 600 lbs. 41 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (323) 189.39; 350-400 lbs (373) 179.42; 400-450 lbs (423) 170.55; 450-500 lbs (470) 163.19; 500-550 lbs (519) 156.03; 550-600 lbs (568) 150.41; 600-650 lbs (627) 143.92; 650-700 lbs (676) 140.03. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (328) 165.80; 350-400 lbs (374) 159.25; 400-450 lbs (425) 152.41; 450-500 lbs (470) 148.21; 500-550 lbs (523) 139.71; 550-600 lbs (572) 135.18; 600-650 lbs (625) 132.63; 650-700 lbs (676) 128.16.

 

 

 

 

 

logo
Friday, April 21, 2017 3:13 PM