THE live cattle and wholesale beef markets are declining seasonally as the November 28 Thanksgiving holiday approaches. This is because turkeys become more front and center in the grocery store than any other protein. But both markets are expected to rebound after the holiday, as retailers return to promoting beef. Rib roasts, as in past years, are expected to feature prominently in retailers’ holiday promotions. Cash live cattle prices however are unlikely to return to the record level of the first week of July. That week saw the 5-area steer price average $197.09 per cwt, which appears set to be the weekly high for the year. The high so far this year for the national comprehensive boxed beef cutout is $324.47 per cwt, also set the first week of July. The cutout is also unlikely to reach this level the rest of the year.
Live cattle prices the week before last fell slightly. The 5-area price averaged $189.82 per cwt live or $296.97 per cwt dressed. These were down $0.23 per cwt and $1.93 per cwt, respectively, from the prior week. The cash trade last week was largely inactive Monday through Wednesday, although 616 head sold in Kansas Monday at mostly $189 per cwt live. Thursday morning saw a light trade up north at $186-188 per cwt live or $294 per cwt dressed. Carcass weights meanwhile in the week ended October 26 set or matched new records in two categories. Heifer weights averaged 866 lbs, the same as the record the week before but up 24 lbs from the same week last year. Steer weights averaged 957 lbs, down 3 lbs from the prior week but up 29 lbs from the same week last year. Overall weights averaged 870 lbs, up 1 lb from the prior week for a new record and up 35 lbs from the same week last year. This was the equivalent of adding 26,205 head to that week’s slaughter total, says HedgersEdge.com
The comprehensive cutout (cuts, grinds and trim) the week before last averaged $316.14 per cwt. This was up $0.73 per cwt from the prior week and up 5.4% on the same week last year. Of note was that formula sales accounted for 58.6% of the total volume of 6884 loads. Spot market sales accounted for 29.1%, forward sales accounted for 12.3% and export sales accounted for 9.6%. Last week saw a sharp decline in cutout values. The Choice cutout lost $6.88 per cwt the first four days and the Select cutout lost $5.31 per cwt.
DENVER VOTERS REJECT DAMAGING ORDINANCE
VOTERS in Denver, Colo., strongly reject a ballot ordinance that would have stopped slaughterhouse production within the city limits. Had it passed, the ordinance would have forced the country’s largest lamb processing plant to close. Early election returns showed the opposition vote was 64.56% compared to 35% who voted for the passing of the ordinance. Had the ordinance been approved, Superior Farms would have needed to shut down by 2026. Its plant processes about 1500 lambs per day, accounting for 15-20% of the total lamb harvest in the U.S. The company employs 160 people, of which nearly 80% are residents of Denver.
An opposition group named “Stop the Ban, Protect Jobs” started a campaign early in 2024, stating its position that the ban unfairly targeted a 70-year-old employee-owned business. Over the last few months, the campaign said the cost of shipping meat from out of state would increase, along with the plant closure and job loss. A study in May by Colorado State University detailed how the ban could reduce Colorado economic activity by $861M and affect more than 2700 jobs. The study cited recent USDA figures that show Colorado has 21 USDA-inspected sheep and lamb slaughter plants operating in the state, with a capacity of 400,000 lambs. Two facilities (Superior and Colorado Lamb Processors) have a capacity greater than 100,000 lambs per year.
SEPT EXPORTS WERE HIGHER THAN LAST YEAR
SEPTEMBER exports of U.S. beef and pork were higher year-over-year, with pork exports well positioned to set annual volume and value records in 2024. September exports totaled 238,047 metric tons (mt), up 8% from a year ago, while value increased 6% to $685.1M. Through the first three quarters of the year, pork exports were 5% above last year’s pace at 2.23M mt, with value up 7% to $6.36 billion. Beef exports totaled 103,980 mt in September, up 5% year-over-year, while export value climbed 6% to $843.8M. January-September beef exports increased 5% in value to $7.82 billion despite volume falling 2% to 960,814 mt. With the exception of China/Hong Kong, September beef exports trended higher than a year ago in all major Asian markets, while demand remained strong in Mexico and shipments to Central America were the largest in 18 months.
U.S. pork’s September performance was especially encouraging because growth was mainly driven by small and medium-sized markets in Central America, Southeast Asia and Oceania, and pork exports to Colombia continue to reach new heights, says Dan Halstrom, President and CEO of the U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF). It was certainly another robust month for pork exports to Mexico and shipments to Japan were above last year. But the broad-based growth reflects the U.S. industry’s strong commitment to market diversification. The tourism rebound in Asia has certainly provided momentum for U.S. beef, especially in Japan, Taiwan and Korea. USMEF also saw impressive growth in the Philippines and Indonesia, which are markets where it sees a lot of untapped growth potential, he says.
Mexico was the leading volume market for U.S. beef exports in September, with shipments climbing 20% from a year ago to 19,692 mt, says USMEF. Export value was 19% above last year at $112.M. January-September exports to Mexico were up 13% to 173,283 mt, while value increased 17% to just over $1 billion. This included 92,465 mt of variety meat exports, up 17% year-over-year, while the value of these items increased 10% to just under $250M. This included about $73M of beef tripe, $69M of lips and $34M of hearts. Total variety meat exports were 24,257 mt, up 9% from a year ago, while value fell 3% to $88.3M. For January through September, beef variety meat exports were 1% higher in volume (215,093 mt) and steady in value ($838.3M), says USMEF.
Exports To Japan Rose 10%
September beef exports to Japan totaled 19,249 mt, up 10% from a year ago, while value increased 6% to $145.8M, says USMEF. Through September, exports were slightly ahead of last year’s pace at 188,885 mt (up 1%), while value climbed 5% to $1.46 billion. Beef exports to South Korea totaled 18,080 mt in September, up slightly from a year ago, while value climbed 10% to $175.5M. Korea is the leading value market for U.S. beef exports and January-September shipments increased 2% from a year ago to $1.6 billion despite a 10% decline in volume (169,145 mt). After a slow start in 2024, beef exports to Taiwan rebounded impressively in the second and third quarters. This trend continued in September, with exports climbing 36% from a year ago to 4702 mt, valued at $53.3M, up 33%. These results pulled January-September exports to Taiwan to within 1% of last year’s pace in volume (47,371 mt), while value increased 8% to $525.1M.
September beef exports to Central America were the largest since March 2023 at 2050 mt, up 15% from a year ago, while value increased 7% to $15M, says USMEF. January-September exports to the region increased 4% to 15,702 mt, valued at $114.9M (up 9%), including sharply higher shipments to Panama and significant growth to Guatemala. Guatemala is the leading Central American market for U.S. beef and shipments are expected to be record large in 2024 for the second consecutive year, at higher unit export prices.
Beef export value equated to $412.52 per head of fed slaughter in September, up 3% from a year ago, says USMEF. The January-September average was $414.62 per head, up 5%. September exports accounted for 13.8% of total September beef production, up from 13.4% last year, while the percentage of muscle cuts exported held steady at 11.3%. For January through September, exports accounted for 13.9% of total production and 11.6% for muscle cuts, each down slightly from a year ago.
LEADERS DISCUSS MEAT’S ROLE
MEAT industry leaders from across the world gathered in Colorado recently to discuss how the solid evidence base supporting the industry can be amplified to inform policies across the world. The Denver summit was the second gathering of a group of scientists who came together in 2022 to write the Dublin Declaration, which proclaimed the important role that meat and livestock play in society. Since then, more than 1200 scientists have signed on to the declaration. The Denver meeting was about taking this evidence base that is being built by scientists to the next level, by ramping up the communications effort and empowering industry leaders to do so, says Beef Central’s Eric Barker, who was at the meeting.
Barker in a story on Beef Central compiled a list of themes that came out of the event. The first was that industry cannot comply its way out of anti-meat policies. Industry groups from across the globe were represented at the conference, including from Europe, Africa and the U.S. Anecdotes across the three days made it clear the industry is facing a monumental challenge to make sure its role is recognized in the face of a well-funded and determined campaign to discredit it, says Barker. The campaign has well and truly reached the halls of power in Europe, with environmental regulations being legislated through supply chains and directly on farms. Europe’s well publicized regulations preventing the import of goods linked to deforestation is evidently having as much of an impact within Europe as outside of it, he says.
There was also plenty of talk about regulations that are preventing the use of tools that have the potential to help meet certain targets, says Barker. As an example, some markets that are putting low emissions targets in place are also banning the use of hormone growth promotants. The measures being put in place are presenting “wicked problems” where fixing one problem is creating another. With many of the measures being driven by groups whose goal is to reduce red meat consumption or eliminate it altogether, it is little wonder the “wicked problems” are occurring. As a result, there was plenty of talk about the need to challenge claims being made about the industry that are not based on good scientific grounds, says Barker.
Challenging Anti-Meat Is Tough
A second theme was that challenging anti-meat campaigns is a tough road, says Barker. Scientists have admitted errors in so-called landmark papers recommending a reduction in red meat consumption after being exposed by scientists involved in the declaration. But the journals have not made any corrections. Many of the scientists at the summit spoke about the publication of papers being held up by journals because of references to red meat. The Dublin Declaration itself has faced considerable pushback, with scientific journals and media articles targeting the funding sources of the Dublin Declaration scientists, singling out individuals and barely challenging the scientific content, says Barker.
Belgian scientist Dr Frederic Leroy said the Dublin Declaration is not an argument for business as usual, as many of its detractors have suggested. “We have been very clear that we are not arguing for business as usual, we have been arguing that we refrain from taking any simplistic ‘one size fits’ all solution. The Dublin challenge consists of making the best of the livestock sector because we have to feed so many people who are already malnourished. This is something that is extremely difficult and we can only get there if we use the best science,” he told the meeting.
A third theme was the difficulty of bringing the industry together on environmental issues, says Barker. While the Dublin Declaration scientists have found a united message to communicate their position, bringing together the industry on the issue is likely to be a difficult task if the environmental session is anything to go by. The session covered a range of topics from greenhouse gas accounting, soil carbon, the historical evolution of ruminant animals and the need to localize solutions to any problems. When the conversation was thrown to the floor, the room heard various debates about extensive grazing versus lot feeding, incentivizing soil carbon and to what degree the industry should be complying with the environmental legislation that is being proposed, says Barker. More on the themes at the meeting on the next page.
Red Meat Is Important For Nutrition
A fourth theme was that there is little doubt that red meat is important for nutrition, says Barker. Well-known food scientists Frederic Leroy, Ty Beal, Andrew Mente and Lora Lannotti all presented studies which demonstrated the potential for red meat to be used to alleviate some of the world’s nutritional issues, whether it be obesity in developed countries or malnutrition in developing countries. They called for nutritional guidelines to focus on making sure populations were adequately nourished, to allow for cultural considerations and limit restrictions in dietary guidelines. There was barely a dissenting voice in the room, only frustration with certain scientific journals that make it hard to publish evidence of red meat being healthy, says Barker.
A fifth theme was that there is plenty of good science being put before the industry, says Barker. The industry has been presented with some of the most comprehensive scientific studies that were done to help better understand and advance it for the future. “I don’t think there are any other conferences out there that have done this job of having this horizontal discussion and putting people with different expertise together in one room to think about animals in the food system,” Leroy told the meeting.
FARMERS HAVE VARIED RETIREMENT PLANS
A FASCINATING new USDA report outlines to what degree farmers and ranchers are set up for retirement through various accounts. It also reveals that they are getting older. Farmers face unique circumstances in saving for and maintaining income during retirement compared with other U.S. residents, says the report from USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS). As business owners, their annual incomes fluctuate depending on market and weather situations, and they may have limited access to employer-sponsored retirement savings plans. However, the majority of farm households include members with off-farm employment, which may provide more stable income and access to retirement benefits, says ERS.
ERS researchers used data from Agricultural Resource Management Surveys from 2018 to 2022 to assess retirement preparedness among U.S. farmers and ranchers. They found that median farm household income was higher than the median income of U.S. households in that period. They also found a greater share of farm households (61%) maintained savings in retirement accounts (including 401(k), 403(b), individual retirement accounts and Keogh accounts) than U.S. households overall (54%) and nonfarm self-employed households (52%).
Around 45% Were 65 And Older
When researchers narrowed their focus to farmers and ranchers at retirement age, they found that in 2021, around 45% of principal operators were 65 years old or older. Among this population, 57% held assets in retirement accounts, which is a higher proportion than the 47% of older U.S. households generally but lower than the 59% of older nonfarm self-employed U.S. households. The findings point to differences in retirement savings across different household types but also suggest that older farm households were less likely than younger farm households to have retirement savings, says ERS.
Even though older farm households were more likely to have retirement accounts than the general population, they had lower levels of retirement savings, says ERS. On average, older farm households had $247,600 in retirement savings compared with $260,900 for older U.S. households and $516,800 for older nonfarm self-employed households. However, farm households had higher levels of total assets than the average U.S. household, although some of these assets may be more difficult to access during retirement. Much of their wealth is concentrated in their farm operations, and tax implications for principal operators could affect whether farm households decide to draw on farm assets during retirement, says ERS.