Livestock and Forages News Articles
Articles published in Arkansas Cattle Business
Animal Science: Today and Tomorrow - June 2006
Both the Arkansas Beef Council and the Division of Agriculture
of the University of Arkansas are dedicated to improving the cattle industry.
However, in order to serve an industry, you must first understand where that
industry is and what makes it tick. To that end, both agencies teamed up to
conduct one of the best-designed and most comprehensive studies ever conducted
of the Arkansas cattle industry. Five groups of 100 producers each were chosen
to be randomly surveyed from approximately 2,000 producers representing cow-calf
(small and large herds), purebred, stocker/feeder, and support industries in 66
counties.
Over the next few columns, we will discuss the findings of this study (titled
"The Arkansas Beef Audit") and highlight producer perceptions about current
strengths, weaknesses, future opportunities, and threats. This month, we will
concentrate on the small cow-calf segment (≤ 50 cows). Demographics Over 69% of the small herd respondents were over 51 years of age, while only 9%
were less than 40 years old. Fifty-eight percent had over 20 years experience in
the cattle business.
Current Strengths and Limitations Small producers indicated that high value was placed on the
"lifestyle" and
family operation often associated with cattle production. While the current high
prices were considered a strength, it was clear from the survey that small
producers managed their herd as much for heritage’s sake - maintenance of a
family legacy - as for profitability. Marketing and expanding marketing
opportunities were viewed as important, though these producers did not believe
they were as well equipped to market their cattle as other groups. They voiced a
belief that they were somewhat isolated from other areas of the beef cattle
industry. The group understood that they made up the largest number of beef
producers and believed that the public had a positive impression of small cattle
producers. They also understood that their large numbers and good standing in
their communities gave them the ability to impact public policy (Table 1).
The small cow-calf respondents were concerned with rising production costs and a
decreasing opportunity to buy land. They recognized that they didn’t spend as
much time improving their herd and facilities as did large cow-calf operations,
or spend as much time as they should.
Future Opportunities and Threats Future opportunities identified by the small cow-calf industry focused on
improved production efficiency. They recognized that they could improve their
herds and that the Extension Service was there to help them. Improving genetics,
adapting to change, and continuing education were seen as ways to make
improvements. The value (and cost) of land held a significant importance to the
group (Table 1).
Escalating land prices are making it harder for people who want to put together
a small herd to acquire land, unless the land is transferred from family members
or rented. Producers saw this as a future threat to their "lifestyle." The small
cow-calf producer has strong concerns about increasing production costs. Without
the scale needed to spread costs over a larger herd, the profitability of the
small cow-calf producer was hit especially hard by high feed/fuel/fertilizer
costs. In spite of that, the small cow-calf producer saw more opportunities than
threats to their industry segment (Table 1).
Educational Opportunities They saw a tremendous opportunity to improve, but economics alone doesn’t impact
their production management decisions. Genetics, production management in a
system approach, and natural resource stewardships were considered to be
educational opportunities for this group. Newsletters and printed material were
highly preferred. One-on-one consultation, group meetings/workshops, and on-farm
demonstrations were the second most preferred educational methods identified.
Small cow-calf producers also valued experiment station field days as an
important educational method. The least preferred educational methods were radio
programs, display/posters, on-line web-based information, distance education,
and e-mail.
Table 1. Responses by Small Cow-Calf Operators (All responses are listed in
order of most important to least important)
Current strengths
1. Ability to improve quality of herd
2. Record high prices
3. Producer independence
4. Ability to improve facilities
5. Good grazing opportunities
6. Low property taxes
7. Marketing opportunities
8. Positive public perception of small cow-calf operations
9. Family involvement
10. Better utilization of marginal land
Current limitations
1. Rising costs
2. Decreasing opportunities to buy land
3. Not following a calf health program
4. Need for better management skills
5. Not capitalizing on market opportunities
6. Lack of capital
7. Lack of knowledge of other segments of the beef industry (stocker, feedlot,
etc.)
8. Lack of large animal veterinarians
9. Children leaving the farm
10. Single sire herd management
Future opportunities
1. Improve genetics of cow-calf herd
2. Education of cow-calf producers
3. Improve production efficiency
4. Adapt to change
5. Age and source verification
6. Establish stronger connections with Extension Service
7. Establishment of cooperative marketing
8. Use of diagnostic tools to manage herd health
9. Bred heifer sales
10. Alliances with seedstock producers
Future threats
1. Increasing production costs
2. Export and import trade issues
3. Disease outbreak
4. Fuel costs
5. Taxes (land use valuation)
6. Decrease in public confidence
7. Cost of mandatory programs
8. Increase in regulations (water quality, land use, zoning)
9. Environmental and animal rights activists
By: Dr. Keith Lusby and Dr. Tom Troxel
Back to
Articles published in Arkansas Cattle Business |
