Canada Threatens U.S. Tariffs On Many Items Because Of Meat Labeling

Ottawa (Dow Jones) – Canada is looking at slapping duties on iconic U.S. products ranging from California wine to ketchup after the World Trade Organization (WTO) found America’s meat-labeling laws offside for a third time in five years.

A WTO appeal panel ruled that a U.S. law requiring grocery stores to list the country of origin on meat products discriminates against Canadian and Mexican livestock, in a decision made public. The Conservative government warned that it will strike back with punitive duties unless the U.S. ends the “blatantly protectionist” regulations, which it says are costing the North American cattle and hog industry more than $1-billion a year.

Canadian Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz insisted Canada will use “any and all means” to get the United States to repeal its labeling country-of-origin legislation (COOL). “Should the U.S. not fix COOL ... Canada will impose retaliatory measures,” Mr. Ritz told reporters via conference call from Saskatoon. “They must be aware that Canada will not blink.”

While the WTO has acknowledged that the U.S. has a right to impose country-of-origin rules, it has so far objected to the means. Ottawa has already identified 38 target products for retaliation. The list includes U.S. cattle and hogs, as well as a number of symbolic products, including California wine, Vermont maple syrup, Florida orange juice, ketchup and breakfast cereal.

Canada and Mexico won a similar case in 2012, but the U.S. Congress responded with new labeling legislation that farmers and meat packers found even more onerous, prompting the latest appeal. Canada will be in a position to get WTO approval to strike back as early as two months from now, or roughly the time it would take for the U.S. to complete a final appeal – something Mr. Ritz acknowledged the U.S. almost certainly will do. Trade experts said that while Canada would be within its rights to retaliate, a full-blown trade war is unlikely. “It’s in the interests of both sides to settle this,” argued Toronto trade lawyer Lawrence Herman. “If the U.S. can’t resolve a dispute with Canada, it doesn’t look very good for all the other trade deals the U.S. is involved in.”

But Mr. Herman pointed out there is virtually no chance of reaching a settlement before U.S. midterm elections in early November. A spokesman for U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman said Washington is considering “all options,” including an appeal. “While the WTO continues to affirm the right of the United States to require country-of-origin labeling for meat products, we are disappointed that the compliance panels have found that the country-of-origin labeling requirements for beef and pork continue to discriminate against Canadian and Mexican livestock exports,” spokesman Matthew McAlvanah said.

The case has taken five years to get this far. The U.S. started enforcing its labeling rules in 2008, cutting Canadian meat exports in half, according to the industry.

USDA Rolls Out Actual Production History Exclusion

By Chris Clayton
DTN Ag Policy Editor

Omaha (DTN) – A provision to exclude yields from Actual Production History for farmers affected by severe weather will go into effect for some select spring crops in 2015, USDA announced. USDA’s rollout comes too late to boost insurance coverage for winter-wheat producers who have been some of the most vocal proponents of the provision. Some wheat growers could pursue litigation over the department’s delayed implementation.

The provision for the 2014 farm bill essentially waives Actual Production History yields that collapsed due to extreme weather. The APH exclusion would adjust a farmer’s actual yields for crop insurance in counties where the average planted-acre yield tumbled at least 50% below a 10-year county average. Under the provision, farmers could exclude yields for up to six years of crops. Growers in contiguous counties would also qualify. “The fact that we are making this available is going to bring some relief to the concerns expressed out in the countryside,” Vilsack said. (For comments on that relief, see our Minding Ag’s Business blog entry “Forgive and Forget Disaster APHs”).

Winter wheat producers in states such as Oklahoma and Texas who have seen multiple disaster crops in recent years due largely to prolonged drought have been the most upset about the provision. They may still have to wait until least fall 2015 to see some relief on their declining insurance coverage.

Tim Bartram, executive director of the Oklahoma Wheat Growers Association, said his members are “very disappointed” that USDA waited until after the Sept. 30 sign-up deadline for winter wheat. Bartram also said wheat growers still feel like there is time to implement the provision for fall crops. His farmer members will continue to raise the issue with USDA and lawmakers. Some likely will look at litigation, particularly depending on how the 2014-15 crop progresses. “It would not shock me, and I know some people are working on it, that there could be some legal challenges,” Bartram said. He added, “I feel fairly comfortable that there will be some legal challenges launched.’’

Since drought began in 2010, farmers in Oklahoma and the Southern Plains have seen winter wheat production tumble to levels not seen since the drought of the 1950s. The 2013-14 wheat crop was the worst in Oklahoma since 1957. Harvest was cut in half with yield declining statewide from 31 bushels an acre in the 2013 harvest to 17 bushels per acre this past summer.

House Ag Committee Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., commended Vilsack and USDA for implementing the provision, which Lucas said “means everything to farmers” who have faced multiple years of drought. Lucas said he is hopeful USDA will make the yield exclusion available for winter wheat. “It is the difference between having viable crop insurance for the coming year or not. It is for these reasons that I worked to include the APH adjustment in the farm bill and why I am pleased the secretary redoubled his efforts to get it done this year,” Lucas said.

Vilsack stressed in his news call that there was not enough time to make the announcement sooner for winter wheat producers. USDA could not reopen the fall crop-insurance sign-up because, “It would create some serious actuarial concerns that would result in a bit off chaos in the market.”

The decision to exclude a year or two of horrific yields will translate into higher premiums for those farmers, but they would not face reductions in coverage levels available to them. In general, producers who take advantage of the exclusion will see higher protection levels, but also higher premiums. Farmers who opt to stand pat would likely see lower premiums, but lower coverage levels offered to them. Details on premium changes may not come until USDA’s Risk Management Agency releases more details about the yield exclusion in December. “This is going to provide some assistance for some producers,” Vilsack said. “Some producers will take advantage of it, some won’t. It’s an individual decision.”

The provision goes into effect for a select number of spring crops nationwide, including corn, soybeans, spring wheat, cotton, grain sorghum, rice, barley, canola, sunflowers, peanuts, and popcorn. USDA said nearly three-fourths of all acres and liability insured in the crop insurance program is included. “While it is not all crops and all acres applicable for liability, it is a significant percentage of both acreage and liability,” Vilsack said.

Vilsack had said in August that USDA would not be able to implement that provision this year. He also said updating APH is complex because it involves computations for each farmer based on each commodity, as well as factoring in county statistics. He said that RMA and the Farm Service Agency are several months ahead of schedule, which allowed contractors and technology staff to focus on the yield exclusion. “This implementation is obviously sooner than we anticipated,” he said.

Vilsack reiterated a couple of times how complex the APH exclusion is to implement and the variables involved. Taking a shot at USDA’s critics, he said it’s easy for “folks sitting in the cheap seats” to second-guess USDA’s implementation of the provision. As USDA rolls out the provision for more crops, it is important to protect the actuarial soundness of the crop-insurance program. “Until I had a briefing by our team recently on the complexity of APH, I didn’t fully appreciate and realize how many calculations and permeations there are to potentially impact a producer’s ability to obtain adequate crop-insurance protection at an affordable price,” Vilsack said.

Lawmakers Ask EPA To Withdraw Proposed CWA Rule

By Todd Neeley
DTN Staff Reporter

Omaha (DTN) – A group of Republican U.S. senators sent a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy and Secretary of the Army John M. McHugh asking EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to withdraw the proposed waters of the U.S. rule. The senators questioned the legitimacy of the current public comment period process set to expire Nov. 14. In short, the senators said the process has been “biased” and EPA has been dishonest with the American public on a number of fronts. “Undoubtedly, there is a disconnect between regulatory reality and the administration’s utopian view of the proposed waters of the United States rule,” the senators said in the letter. “We believe this reflects the EPA’s and the Corps’ refusal to listen to the thousands of Americans who have asked that the proposed rule be immediately withdrawn. Indeed, there have been several examples of bias against the proposed rule’s critics.”

The letter is signed by Sens. John Barrasso, Wyo.; Ted Cruz, Texas; Mitch McConnell, Ky.; David Vitter, La.; Pat Roberts, Kan.; Mike Enzi, Wyo.; John Cornyn, Texas; Jim Risch, Idaho; Marco Rubio, Fla.; Mike Crapo, Idaho; Roger, Wicker, Miss.; Jim Inhofe, Okla.; Jeff Sessions, Ala.; Chuck Grassley, Iowa; Roy Blunt, Mo.; John Boozman, Ark.; Mike Johanns, Neb.; Tim Scott, S.C.; Deb Fischer, Neb.; Orrin Hatch, Utah; Jerry Moran, Kan.; Rand Paul, Ky.; Johnny Isakson, Ga.; and Mike Lee, Utah.

The senators allege EPA has misled the public in claiming the rule was based on requests for clarification in the act; that the administration “insinuates that opposition” to the rule is “equivalent to opposition to clean water;” that EPA has “attempted to delegitimize questions and concerns” about the rule; that the agencies have “blatantly misrepresented the impacts” of the proposed rule; and that EPA may have violated the Anti-Lobbying Act by advocating for the proposed rule on social media, including a “Ditch the Myth” campaign. “A request for a regulatory clarification does not provide a license to run roughshod over the property rights of millions of Americans,” the senators said. “Yet the Obama administration has used prior rulemaking requests as an excuse to unilaterally advance a regulatory agenda that defies” the limits of the Clean Water Act when it was enacted in 1972.

RULE OPPOSITION
The senators point out that the EPA Office of Water suggested in a Sept. 9 blog that those who “choose clean water” should support the proposed rule, and that opponents of the measure don’t want clean water.
The lawmakers blasted EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy for comments she made in response to questions raised about the rule when she said the issues raised were “ludicrous” and “silly.” “EPA’s disparaging of the proposed rule’s critics serves no one,” the senators said. “If EPA believes concerns with the proposed rule are unwarranted, the appropriate course of action would be for the agency to respond formally in the context of the notice and comment procedures accompanying the current rulemaking.’’

UNDERESTIMATE IMPACTS
The senators say EPA and the Corps have “blatantly misrepresented the impacts” of the proposed rule. Both agencies have said the rule would not infringe on personal property rights and would not impede economic development. The U.S. Small Business Administration recently said the rule could impose wide-ranging costs on small businesses and others as they work to comply. “These assertions strain credulity,” the senators said. “Given the history of regulatory and land use issues associated with the Clean Water Act (including numerous congressional hearings, Supreme Court cases, and real-world examples of costs and hardship resulting from affirmative jurisdictional determinations), it is astonishing that any federal agency would claim that a designation of private property as ‘waters of the United States’ does not affect the landowner’s property rights.’’

On the social media front, the senators said, “EPA staff are asking the public to influence the agency’s view” of the proposed rule. “In fact, the Twitter account for EPA’s Office of Water is now essentially a lobbyist for the proposed rule.” The senators suggest that could violate the Anti-Lobbying Act, which in part prohibits the use of federal funds to influence members of Congress or a government official. “EPA’s social media advocacy is a firm indicator that adverse comments will receive scant attention during the rulemaking period,” the letter said.

Also, Sens. John Thune, R-S.D.; Johanns, Grassley, Roberts, Thad Cochran, R-Miss.; Boozman, Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga.; McConnell and John Hoeven, R-N.D., asked EPA and the Corps to withdraw an interpretative rule that currently includes 56 conservation practices exempt from the proposed CWA rule, if they meet Natural Resource Conservation Service specifications.
Read the first letter here, http://tinyurl.com/lp332r9.

Direct Receipts

Direct Receipts: 58,000

Texas 30,300. 97 pct over 600 lbs. 29 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 FOB 635 lbs 251.50; 700-740 lbs 235.23; 750-775 lbs 236.59; 800-825 lbs 236.59; Dec 750 lbs 227.13; Jan 750-775 lbs 228.67; Apr 750 lbs 226.45; Del Current 735 lbs 238.00; 750-775 lbs 235.32; 800-805 lbs 237.01; 850-865 lbs 228.64; Del Feb 750 lbs 229.50; 800 lbs 225.40; Mar 775 lbs 226.45. Medium and Large 1-2 FOB Current 500 lbs 280.20; 615 lbs 242.30; 655-695 lbs 236.78; 705-750 lbs 230.92; 750-775 lbs 226.91; 800-845 lbs 226.74; 850-855 lbs 220.95; 900 lbs 208.85; Nov 650-675 lbs 249.49; 750-785 lbs 234.91; 800 lbs 227.50; Dec 650 lbs 252.90; 775 lbs 225.85; Del Current 685 lbs 246.00; 705-725 lbs 242.67; 750-775 lbs 238.28; 800-825 lbs 228.19; Nov 850 lbs 225.00; Dec 660 lbs 249.50. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 700 lbs 232.50; Dec 725 lbs 219.00; Jan 650 lbs 225.79; 725 lbs 219.05; Feb 650 lbs 223.40; Mar 650 lbs 223.65; 700 lbs 217.45; Del Current 700-725 lbs 227.30; 750-785 lbs 221.37; Dec 700 lbs 220.40; Jan 650 lbs 226.15; Feb 700 lbs 222.50; Mar 700 lbs 222.45. Medium and Large 12 FOB Current 550 lbs 213.40; 650 lbs 233.35; 725 lbs 218.34; Nov 760 lbs 223.65; Dec 775 lbs 211.62; Del Current 650 lbs 237.00; 725 lbs 228.00; Nov 775 lbs 213.00.

Oklahoma 5400. 100 pct over 600 lbs. 31 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 725-735 lbs 236.86; 750-775 lbs 233.93; 800 lbs 233.49; 850 lbs 228.30. Medium and Large 1-2 FOB Feb 750 lbs 228.60. Medium and Large 2 Del Current 695 lbs 229.00. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 665-670 lbs 228.19; 725 lbs 230.50; 750 lbs 224.00; Jan 650 lbs 223.15; Feb 700 lbs 220.50.

New Mexico 10,000. 100 pct over 600 lbs. 49 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 Current 750 lbs 234.20; Mar 775 lbs 225.45. Medium and Large 1-2 Current 800-825 lbs 229.72; 850 lbs 218.79. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 Current 700 lbs 226.05; Dec 700 lbs 219.42. Medium and Large 1-2 Current 725 lbs 227.62.

Kansas 4200. 100 pct 600 over lbs. 17 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 750 lbs 238.74; 800-825 lbs 236.87; 850-860 lbs 229.45; 920 lbs 223.00; 950 lbs 215.00; Del Current 635 lbs 253.00; 685 lbs 246.00; 700-750 lbs 242.01; 765 lbs 240.00; 800 lbs 237.50. Medium and Large 1-2 FOB Feb 800 lbs 222.40; Del Current 740 lbs 237.16; 750 lbs 231.00. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 725 lbs 229.47; 750 lbs 226.00; Del Current 650 lbs 235.00. Medium and Large 1-2 FOB Current 795 lbs 217.00.

National Feeder Cattle Summary

St. Joseph, MO — October 24
National feeder cattle receipts: 315,200

Feeder cattle and calves sold very uneven as prices on yearlings traded unevenly steady; early in the week mostly steady to $5 lower then firming up mid-week trading steady $5 higher. The calf market remains very uneven and volatile with the month of October showing some pressure this week on new arrivals of new crop bawlers which is typical of autumn as market pressure was noted this week on those unweaned calves in which supplies always outweighs demand at this time of year. There were instances on lightweight calves under 450 lbs that sold $10-15 lower as prices for these lightweight calves have been very lofty. Calves weighing 450-650 lbs all traded with very wide price ranges and trends across the trading areas from unevenly steady to $5 higher to $5 lower. Also of note at several auctions, a lighter presence of farmer feeders due to harvest getting back into full swing this week. USDA reported slower harvest pace than normal with 31 percent of the corn harvested with the 5 year average of 53 percent. Soybeans are also behind with 53 percent harvested with the 5 year average at 66 percent. Unweaned bawlers will continue to be scrutinized with additional discounts for being fleshy or having a snotty nose as health issues will always be a concern. Most cattle growers would love to fill their orders with calves weaned at least 45 days and an extensive precondition program, but many calves are coming to the auction right off the cow and in many cases with little use of knives or needles. Wheat pasture prospects look very bright across much of the Hard Red Winter Wheat regions as demand for stockers remain very good with Corn Belt cattlemen having lots of silage, hay and corn. In Bassett, NE on Wednesday the replacement heifer offering was in very good shape as a near pot load of fancy replacement heifers weighing 555 lbs sold at $372 or $2064 per head. In Philip, SD on Tuesday over 1200 head of 500-550 lb steers averaging 531 lbs sold with a weighted average price of $309.68. Last week’s fully steady fat cattle trade was a big positive with the meltdown that occurred in the Stock Market and swept through many of the commodity markets as economic situations have calmed down in the short term. On Thursday afternoon fat cattle trade busted loose in a big way as live prices again hit record highs in the Southern Plains and Nebraska with live prices $5-6 higher at $170. Packers needed inventory to secure needs proving that Supply and Demand still has a valid presence. The next question is where do boxed beef prices go from here, leaving plenty of questions for traders to ponder as live and feeder cattle futures on Friday closed with triple digit losses. Traders seemed more concerned with Friday’s afternoon Cattle on Feed Report that ended up being right in line with industry guesses. The report would be viewed as neutral as October 1 inventory was reported at 99.5 percent of a year ago; placements at 101.0 percent of a year ago; marketings at 99.5 percent of a year ago. This week’s auction volume included 37 percent over 600 lbs and 37 percent heifers.
Texas 7100. 55 pct over 600 lbs. 42 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (333) 340.65; 350-400 lbs (374) 338.74; 400-450 lbs (428) 305.82; 450-500 lbs (472) 298.74; 500-550 lbs (527) 277.09; 550-600 lbs (569) 257.33; 600-650 lbs (626) 244.44; 650-700 lbs (679) 237.54; 700-750 lbs (728) 232.35; 750-800 lbs (770) 236.71; 800-850 lbs (811) 221.14; few loads 905 lbs 225.50. Medium and Large 1-2 400-450 lbs (427) 285.45; 450-500 lbs (476) 275.77; 500-550 lbs (523) 248.59; 550-600 lbs (572) 242.81; 600-650 lbs (619) 223.91; 700-750 lbs (717) 216.98; 750-800 lbs (784) 225.19; 800-850 lbs (819) 214.55. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (329) 300.74; 350-400 lbs (377) 303.21; 400-450 lbs (428) 263.84; 450-500 lbs (480) 259.52; 500-550 lbs (526) 237.45; 550-600 lbs (563) 227.67; 600-650 lbs (627) 236.23; 650-700 lbs (674) 227.95; 700-750 lbs (720) 224.40; 750-800 lbs (778) 209.01; 800-850 lbs (802) 211.86. Medium and Large 1-2 350-400 lbs (376) 295.36; 400-450 lbs (418) 241.53; 450-500 lbs (463) 246.14; 500-550 lbs (524) 233.43; 550-600 lbs (575) 222.67; 600-650 lbs (625) 214.50; 650-700 lbs (684) 208.21; 700-750 lbs (731) 206.33.
Oklahoma 34,400. 59 pct over 600 lbs. 35 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (327) 377.93; 350-400 lbs (368) 353.03; 400-450 lbs (428) 326.41; 450-500 lbs (471) 307.47; 500-550 lbs (525) 283.38; 550-600 lbs (572) 267.79; 600-650 lbs (627) 256.09; 650-700 lbs (664) 248.45; 700-750 lbs (722) 240.98; 750-800 lbs (770) 239.56; 800-850 lbs (821) 232.67; 850-900 lbs (876) 225.60; 900-950 lbs (911) 219.17; 950-1000 lbs (979) 204.14. Medium and Large 1-2 350-400 lbs (379) 326.24; 400-450 lbs (429) 307.09; 450-500 lbs (473) 288.08; 500-550 lbs (533) 268.00; 550-600 lbs (579) 255.45; 600-650 lbs (624) 240.51; 650-700 lbs (682) 231.15; 700-750 lbs (728) 232.87; 750-800 lbs (771) 233.04; 800-850 lbs (822) 226.55; 850-900 lbs (890) 215.68; 900-950 lbs (928) 209.84; 950-1000 lbs (968) 203.18. Holsteins: Large 3 few loads 785 lbs 184.00. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 250-300 lbs (268) 321.31; 300-350 lbs (336) 321.61; 350-400 lbs (376) 299.46; 400-450 lbs (419) 282.24; 450-500 lbs (475) 262.13; 500-550 lbs (520) 248.09; 550-600 lbs (569) 240.64; 600-650 lbs (633) 238.43; 650-700 lbs (672) 234.24; 700-750 lbs (718) 228.50; 750-800 lbs (772) 220.48; 800-850 lbs (831) 210.85; 850-900 lbs (876) 201.82; 900-950 lbs (919) 197.45; 950-1000 lbs (993) 183.73; half load 1005 lbs 168.00. Medium and Large 1-2 300-350 lbs (318) 308.04; 350-400 lbs (377) 281.33; 400-450 lbs (431) 264.54; 450-500 lbs (472) 251.53; 500-550 lbs (528) 235.09; 550-600 lbs (576) 227.81; 600-650 lbs (622) 222.59; 650-700 lbs (677) 214.13; 700-750 lbs (723) 221.39; 750-800 lbs (780) 211.82.
New Mexico 5900. 41 pct over 600 lbs. 31 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 250-300 lbs (268) 346.27; 300-350 lbs (332) 363.68; 350-400 lbs (380) 332.44; 400-450 lbs (425) 309.68; 450-500 lbs (468) 292.13; 500-550 lbs (528) 273.53; 550-600 lbs (571) 259.02; 600-650 lbs (618) 236.22; 650-700 lbs (664) 228.70; 700-750 lbs (715) 214.79; 750-800 lbs (759) 215.38; half load 1080 lbs 160.00. Medium and Large 1-2 300-350 lbs (340) 329.15; 350-400 lbs (377) 315.56; 400-450 lbs (432) 293.30; 450-500 lbs (472) 272.31; 500-550 lbs (524) 252.23; 550-600 lbs (579) 238.34; 600-650 lbs (639) 229.36; 650-700 lbs (678) 223.21; 700-750 lbs (727) 193.54; 750-800 lbs (772) 221.00; 800-850 lbs (832) 205.97. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 250-300 lbs (277) 318.84; 300-350 lbs (340) 313.05; 350-400 lbs (364) 298.02; 400-450 lbs (426) 274.68; 450-500 lbs (470) 260.67; 500-550 lbs (522) 239.76; 550-600 lbs (578) 232.38; 600-650 lbs (618) 226.38; 650-700 lbs (677) 204.66; 700-750 lbs (711) 211.85. Medium and Large 1-2 300-350 lbs (341) 276.08; 400-450 lbs (440) 253.15; 450-500 lbs (480) 239.66; 500-550 lbs (520) 224.23; 700-750 lbs (723) 192.78.
Kansas 11,700. 61 pct over 600 lbs. 36 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (339) 400.33; 400-450 lbs (419) 330.59; 450-500 lbs (462) 342.66; 500-550 lbs (523) 311.25; 550-600 lbs (567) 288.57; 600-650 lbs (621) 268.25; 650-700 lbs (671) 266.82; 700-750 lbs (706) 250.44; 750-800 lbs (771) 240.80; 800-850 lbs (822) 236.57; 850-900 lbs (873) 233.43; 900-950 lbs (916) 219.36; 950-1000 lbs (974) 206.25. Medium and Large 1-2 450-500 lbs (475) 298.50; 500-550 lbs (523) 290.64; 550-600 lbs (576) 273.15; 600-650 lbs (621) 260.80; 650-700 lbs (668) 247.53; 700-750 lbs (735) 238.38; 750-800 lbs (776) 231.63; 800-850 lbs (837) 228.70; 900-950 lbs (914) 210.20. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 350-400 lbs (376) 324.07; 400-450 lbs (422) 307.70; 450-500 lbs (477) 311.67; 500-550 lbs (527) 273.40; 550-600 lbs (570) 265.75; 600-650 lbs (622) 252.17; 650-700 lbs (676) 238.87; 700-750 lbs (718) 230.92; 750-800 lbs (758) 224.80; 850-900 lbs (879) 213.46. Medium and Large 1-2 350-400 lbs (374) 296.92; 400-450 lbs (419) 288.61; 450-500 lbs (479) 281.76; 500-550 lbs (524) 261.05; 550-600 lbs (572) 252.80; 600-650 lbs (629) 242.55; 650-700 lbs (660) 234.72; 700-750 lbs (739) 223.06; 750-800 lbs (784) 220.88; 800-850 lbs (822) 213.21; 850-900 lbs (876) 208.29.
Missouri 28,900. 40 pct over 600 lbs. 35 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 250-300 lbs (277) 350.32; 300-350 lbs (318) 344.10; 350-400 lbs (376) 333.58; 400-450 lbs (426) 316.24; 450-500 lbs (476) 293.02; 500-550 lbs (523) 280.25; 550-600 lbs (574) 261.46; 600-650 lbs (623) 255.72; 650-700 lbs (671) 246.97; 700-750 lbs (721) 246.97; 750-800 lbs (771) 233.22; 800-850 lbs (835) 236.97; 850-900 lbs (884) 226.14; 900-950 lbs (917) 224.49; 950-1000 lbs (974) 216.98. Medium and Large 1-2 300-350 lbs (332) 310.90; 350-400 lbs (371) 301.58; 400-450 lbs (432) 290.02; 450-500 lbs (474) 268.97; 500-550 lbs (522) 256.97; 550-600 lbs (577) 246.68; 600-650 lbs (627) 241.83; 650-700 lbs (679) 232.56; 700-750 lbs (722) 230.08; 750-800 lbs (777) 222.59; 800-850 lbs (828) 222.20; 850-900 lbs (852) 219.72; 900-950 lbs (917) 216.01. Holsteins: Large 3 400-450 lbs (420) 228.04; 450-500 lbs (472) 231.83; 500-550 lbs (521) 214.97; 550-600 lbs (577) 203.03; 600-650 lbs (622) 204.67; 650-700 lbs (674) 191.98; 700-750 lbs (721) 183.57; 800-850 lbs (830) 171.37; 850-900 lbs (884) 175.12. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 250-300 lbs (279) 313.32; 300-350 lbs (324) 293.74; 350-400 lbs (374) 281.29; 400-450 lbs (424) 268.81; 450-500 lbs (473) 259.71; 500-550 lbs (522) 248.07; 550-600 lbs (573) 246.02; 600-650 lbs (628) 239.16; 650-700 lbs (672) 231.17; 700-750 lbs (720) 224.74; 750-800 lbs (775) 219.23; 800-850 lbs (817) 215.07; 850-900 lbs (877) 209.02; half load 930 lbs 217.00. Medium and Large 1-2 250-300 lbs (274) 285.08; 300-350 lbs (330) 269.58; 350-400 lbs (375) 263.39; 400-450 lbs (425) 252.84; 450-500 lbs (473) 244.94; 500-550 lbs (526) 233.48; 550-600 lbs (574) 230.67; 600-650 lbs (626) 222.67; 650-700 lbs (675) 218.29; 700-750 lbs (729) 219.33; 750-800 lbs (774) 206.63; 800-850 lbs (814) 214.99.
Arkansas 7100. 30 pct over 600 lbs. 40 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (325) 326.09; 350-400 lbs (370) 310.31; 400-450 lbs (420) 298.79; 450-500 lbs (471) 279.56; 500-550 lbs (523) 254.98; 550-600 lbs (570) 241.21; 600-650 lbs (621) 232.37; 650-700 lbs (670) 225.51. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (325) 291.04; 350-400 lbs (373) 271.38; 400-450 lbs (426) 258.96; 450-500 lbs (474) 244.71; 500-550 lbs (522) 229.83; 550-600 lbs (568) 224.92; 600-650 lbs (620) 217.20; 650-700 lbs (676) 211.30.

 

 

logo
Thursday, October 30, 2014 10:58 AM