Beef Cattle and Genetic Exporters
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Mad-Cow’ Worries Intensify Becoming Prevalent.” Institute
The National Livestock Weekly May 26, 2003 • Vol. 82, No. 32 “The Industry’s Largest Weekly Circulation” www.wlj.net • E-mail: [email protected] • [email protected] • [email protected] A Crow Publication ‘Mad-cow’ worries intensify becoming prevalent.” Institute. “The (import) ban has but because the original diagnosis Canada has a similar feed ban to caused a lot of problems with our was pneumonia, the cow was put Canada what the U.S. has implemented. members and we’re hopeful for this on a lower priority list for testing. Under that ban, ruminant feeds situation to be resolved in very The provincial testing process reports first cannot contain animal proteins be- short order.” showed a possible positive vector North American cause they may contain some brain The infected cow was slaugh- for mad-cow and from there the and spinal cord matter, thought to tered January 31 and condemned cow was sent to a national testing BSE case. carry the prion causing mad-cow from the human food supply be- laboratory for a follow-up test. Fol- disease. cause of symptoms indicative of lowing a positive test there, the Beef Industry officials said due to pneumonia. That was the prima- test was then conducted by a lab Canada’s protocol regarding the ry reason it took so long for the cow in England, where the final de- didn’t enter prevention of mad-cow disease, to be officially diagnosed with BSE. termination is made on all BSE- food chain. they are hopeful this is only an iso- The cow, upon being con- suspect animals. -
Genetic Markers for Polled, African Horn and Scurs Genes in Tropical Beef Cattle
final reportp Project code: B.AHW.0144 Prepared by: Dr John Henshall CSIRO Livestock Industries Date published: November 2011 ISBN: 9781741916683 PUBLISHED BY Meat & Livestock Australia Limited Locked Bag 991 NORTH SYDNEY NSW 2059 Genetic markers for polled, African Horn and Scurs genes in tropical beef cattle Meat & Livestock Australia acknowledges the matching funds provided by the Australian Government to support the research and development detailed in this publication. This publication is published by Meat & Livestock Australia Limited ABN 39 081 678 364 (MLA). Care is taken to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this publication. However MLA cannot accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the information or opinions contained in the publication. You should make your own enquiries before making decisions concerning your interests. Reproduction in whole or in part of this publication is prohibited without prior written consent of MLA. Genetic markers for polled, African Horn and Scurs genes in tropical beef cattle Abstract The objective of this project was to develop gene marker tests for the Polled, Scurs and African Horn genes. A microsatellite marker was found that is very closely associated with the polled locus in Brahman, Santa Gertrudis, Hereford, Droughtmaster and Limousin. In these breeds animals homozygous for the allele associated with polled almost never have horns or scurs, so no additional test for the scurs or African horn gene is required. In Tropical Composite cattle, those that are homozygous for the allele associated with polled are most likely to be polled, but also may be horned or scurred. This may be due to incomplete association, or due to another region of the chromosome such as the hypothesised African Horn gene. -
Grass: the Market Potential for U.S. Grassfed Beef 3 Table of Contents
BACK TO GRASS THE MARKET POTENTIAL FOR U.S. GRASSFED BEEF Photo: Carman Ranch ABOUT THIS REPORT Grassfed beef in the U.S. is a fast-growing This report was produced through the consumer phenomenon that is starting to collaboration of Stone Barns Center for Food attract the attention of more cattle producers and Agriculture, a nonprofit sustainable and food companies, but there is a lack of agriculture organization dedicated to changing coherent information on how the market works. the way America eats and farms; Armonia LLC, While the U.S. Department of Agriculture a certified B-Corp with a mission to restore (USDA) produces a vast body of data on the harmony through long-term investments; conventional beef sector, its data collection and Bonterra Partners, an investment consulting reporting efforts on grassfed beef are spotty. firm specializing in sustainable agriculture and Pockets of information are held by different other natural capital investments; and SLM private sector organizations, but they have Partners, an investment management firm that rarely been brought together. focuses on ecological farming systems. The lead authors were Renee Cheung of Bonterra This report addresses that gap by providing Partners and Paul McMahon of SLM Partners; a comprehensive overview of the U.S. they were assisted by Erik Norell, Rosalie Kissel grassfed beef sector, with a focus on market and Donny Benz. and economic dynamics. It brings together available data on the current state of the sector, Dr. Allen Williams of Grass Fed Insights, identifies barriers to growth and highlights LLC acted as a consultant to the project and actions that will help propel further expansion. -
What Have We Learned from Cattle/Beef Disputes?
What Have We Learned from Cattle/Beef Disputes? R.M.A. Loyns, President, Prairie Horizons, Ltd. and Former Professor, University of Manitoba; Linda M. Young, Agricultural Policy Coordinator, Trade Research Center; and Colin A. Carter, Professor, University of California–Davis Research Discussion Paper No. 41 April 2000 The purpose of research discussion papers is to make research findings available to researchers and the public before they are available in professional journals. Consequently, they are not peer reviewed. This paper was first prepared for presentation at a conference, Trade Liberalization under NAFTA: Report Card in Agriculture, sponsored by the Policy Disputes Information Consortium. The Consortium, with members from NAFTA countries representing government, business, and academia, have sponsored six workshops on agricultural policy issues within NAFTA. Their publications are discussed at www.farmfoundation.org/pubs2.htm. The authors acknowledge research/drafting assistance provided by Kitty Sue Squires (MSU), Julia Davis (UC Davis), and the NCBA and CCA for providing documents for review. The authors also want to thank Gary Brester and John Marsh (MSU) for the generous use of several graphs. What Have We Learned from Cattle/Beef Disputes? Abuse of important trade laws represents one of the most ominous threats to a liberal international trading regime. Joseph Stiglitz, SEJ, 1997. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF THE PAPER In this paper, informal and formal disputes in the cattle/beef sector are identified because they are both important to understanding trading relations among the United States, Mexico, and Canada. R-CALF, and antidumping duties imposed by Mexico against imports of U.S. beef in 1999, are the only formal disputes that we have found. -
Southeast Asia Acknowledgements the Subregional Factsheet Was Prepared by Marieke Reuver
Subregional Report on Animal Genetic Resources: Southeast Asia Acknowledgements The Subregional Factsheet was prepared by Marieke Reuver. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. All rights reserved. Reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product for educational or other non-commercial purposes are authorized without any prior written permission from the copyright holders provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of material in this information product for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without written permission of the copyright holders. Applications for such permission should be addressed to: Chief Electronic Publishing Policy and Support Branch Communication Division FAO Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy or by e-mail to: [email protected] © FAO 2007 Citation: FAO. 2007. Subregional report on animal genetic resources: Southeast Asia. Annex to The State of the World’s Animal Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. -
Cattle Markets Task Force REPORT
Cattle Markets Task Force REPORT SEPTEMBER 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary Page 3 II. Cattle Markets Task Force Report Page 5 III. The Work of the Task Force Page 6 IV. Nebraska’s Cattle Industry Page 10 V. Task Force Recommendations Pages 16-33 V. i - Fed Cattle Markets Page 16 V. ii - Livestock Market Reporting Act Page 21 V. iii - Small and Medium-Sized Packing Facilities Page 23 V. iv - Packer Market Power Page 25 V. v - Risk Management Page 30 V. vi - Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling (MCOOL) Page 33 VI. Conclusion Page 36 2 Cattle Markets Task Force Report - September 2020 I. Executive Summary SUMMARY OF TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS Following the large cattle market and boxed beef price shifts after the fire at the Tyson beef processing facility in Holcomb, Kansas, the Nebraska Farm Bureau (NEFB) State Board of Directors voted to create a Cattle Markets Task Force charged with examining current Farm Bureau policy, providing policy recommendations, and providing input on what NEFB’s role should be in addressing concerns regarding cattle markets. The closure of a number of processing facilities due to the COVID-19 pandemic created an even larger disparity between the price producers received vs. retail and boxed beef prices. Over the course of five months, the NEFB Cattle Markets Task Force met online and in person with agriculture economists, cattle organizations, auction barn owners, feedlot managers, restaurant owners, and consultants in order to gain a better understanding of the entire beef supply chain. Following the Task Force’s initial meetings, the group decided on six topics to explore and ultimately suggest policy resolutions. -
An Evaluation of Growth and Body Composition of Droughtmaster
AN EVALUATION OF GROWTH AND BODY COMPOSITION OF DROUGHTMASTER CATTLE IN NORTHERN QUEENSLAND A Thesis by STEFEN MILES TUCKER Submitted to the Office of Graduate and Professional Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Chair of Committee, Andy D. Herring Co-Chair of Committee, Chris Skaggs Committee Member, John R. Rayfield Head of Department, H. Russell Cross May 2015 Major Subject: Animal Science Copyright 2015 Stefen Miles Tucker ABSTRACT The overall objective of this research was to evaluate impacts on growth of Droughtmaster cattle in northern Queensland based on four years (2009-2012) of repeated weight records from a single operation. Animals (total records n = 1,717) were identified by management group (n = 43). Gender consisted of females (n = 786), bulls (n = 386), and steers (n = 545). Age at weight evaluation varied substantially across management groups and was therefore nested within each management group to create a 90-day window. Age, sire, and age of dam, impacted (P < 0.001) weights taken at branding, and, sire and age showed significance at every weight taken (P < 0.001). Age of dam was significant for weaning weight (P = 0.002), but became irrelevant for yearling (P = 0.7252) and final (P = 0.1423) weights. Heritability values for branding, weaning, yearling, and final weight were calculated from estimates of sire variance to be 0.35, 0.42, 0.23, and 0.49, respectively. Heritability values of weight gain from birth to branding, branding to weaning, weaning to yearling, and yearling to final weights were estimated to be 0.23, 0.09, 0.26, and 0.29, respectively. -
$Νͩgȫsȫodⱥ 1Sεdȳfȝ̢oht
E-435 $SSOLHG5HSURGXFWLYH6WUDWHJLHVLQ%HHI&DWWOH $ΝͩGȪSȪODȺ1SΕDȲFȜ̢OHT 1RYHPEHU 0HPRULDO6WXGHQW&HQWHU 7H[DV$ 08QLYHUVLW\ &ROOHJH6WDWLRQ7H[DV 1SɚȪͩUFȠCZ 1RUWK&HQWUDO5HJLRQ%RYLQH 5HSURGXFWLRQ7DVN)RUFH 7H[DV$JULFXOWXUDO([SHULPHQW6WDWLRQ 7H[DV&RRSHUDWLYH([WHQVLRQ 7H[DV$ 0'HSDUWPHQWRI$QLPDO6FLHQFH 7H[DV$ 0&ROOHJHRI9HWHULQDU\0HGLFLQH DQG%LRPHGLFDO6FLHQFHV 2IILFHRI9HWHULQDU\&RQWLQXLQJ(GXFDWLRQ SPONSORS Gold Level Silver Level ABS Global ALLTECH www.abs.com www.alltech.com Aloka Bovine Elite www. Aloka.com www.bovine-elite.com COBA/Select Sires Classic Medical www.selectsires.com www.classicmedical.com IVX Animal Health HeatWatch www.dvmpharmaceuticals.com www.cowchips.net Pfizer Animal Health Intervet www.pfizerah.com www.intervet.com Merial Universal Cooperative/Estrus http://us.merial.com Alert; www.estrusalert.com NCBA www.ncba.com PROCEEDINGS APPLIED REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGIES IN BEEF CATTLE November 12 and 13, 2005 Memorial Student Center, Texas A&M University College Station Edited by G.L. Williams and D.W. Forrest Program Coordinators: Dr. Gary Williams, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Beeville Dr. David Forrest, Texas A&M University, College Station Dr. David Patterson, University of Missouri, Columbia Presented By: North Central Reproductive Task Force and The Texas A&M University System Including: Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Texas Cooperative Extension Texas A&M University Department of Animal Science Texas A&M University College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences Office of Veterinary Continuing Education CONTINUING EDUCATION The Texas Board of Veterinary Examiners has approved this program for 15 continuing education units The American Registry of Professional Animal Scientists has approved this program for 13 continuing education units ADDITIONAL COPIES Additional copies of the proceedings can be purchased for $25.00 by contacting the Department of Animal Science, 2471 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843-2471; Tel. -
2017 Livestock and Products Annual Uruguay
THIS REPORT CONTAINS ASSESSMENTS OF COMMODITY AND TRADE ISSUES MADE BY USDA STAFF AND NOT NECESSARILY STATEMENTS OF OFFICIAL U.S. GOVERNMENT POLICY Required Report - public distribution Date: 9/5/2017 GAIN Report Number: Uruguay Livestock and Products Annual 2017 Approved By: Lazaro Sandoval Prepared By: Ken Joseph Report Highlights: Uruguayan beef exports for 2018 are forecast to decline by almost 3 percent to 420,000 tons. This volume is slightly lower the volumes of the past two years, but still one of the highest on record. China will continue to be the top market, followed by the EU and the United States. Exporters are looking forward to the opening of the Japanese market. Beef production in 2018 is projected to drop marginally to 570,000 tons due to slightly lower slaughter. Domestic consumption is also expected to decline. Executive Summary: Commodities: Animal Numbers, Cattle Meat, Beef and Veal Author Defined: Production Beef production in Uruguay in 2018 is forecast to fall to 570,000 tons carcass weight equivalent (cwe) because of the drop in the number of slaughtered cattle. Local analysts project a lower slaughter of cows than the previous years, maintaining a relatively stable slaughter of steers. The average carcass weight is forecast to increase moderately. The Uruguayan livestock sector is expected to remain stable, with relatively small production variations from one year to the other. The cattle ending stock in 2018 is forecast at almost 12 million head. Despite large exports of live cattle, representing 12-14 percent of the annual slaughter, the calving seasons of 2017 and 2018 are forecast to be more abundant than normal. -
Guidelines for Uniform Beef Improvement Programs
Guidelines For Uniform Beef Improvement Programs Ninth Edition “To develop cooperation among all segments of the beef industry in the compilation and utilization of performance records to improve efficiency, profitability and sustainability of beef production.” First Edition 1970 Second Edition 1972 Third Edition 1976 Forth Edition 1981 Fifth Edition 1986 Sixth Edition 1990 Seventh Edition 1996 Eighth Edition 2002 Ninth Edition 2010 Guidelines is a publication of the Beef Improvement Federation, Joe Cassady, Executive Director, North Carolina State University, Campus Box 7621, Raleigh, NC 27695 www.beefimprovement.org CONTRIBUTORS Editors Larry V. Cundiff, U.S. Meat Animal Research Center, ARS, USDA, L. Dale Van Vleck, U.S. Meat Animal Research Center, ARS, USDA and the University of Nebraska William D. Hohenboken, Virginia Tech Chapter 1, Introduction Ronnie Silcox, University of Georgia Chapter 2, Breeding Herd Evaluation Bill Bowman, American Angus Association Bruce Golden, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Lowell Gould, Denton, Texas Robert Hough, Red Angus Association of America Kenda Ponder, Red Angus Association of America Robert E. Williams, American International Charolais Association Lauren Hyde, North American Limousin Foundation Chapter 3, Animal Evaluation Denny Crews, Colorado State University Michael Dikeman, Kansas State University Sally L. Northcutt, American Angus Association Dorian Garrick, Iowa State University Twig T. Marston, University of Nebraska Michael MacNeil, Fort Keogh Livestock and Range Research Lab., ARS, USDA, Larry W. Olson, Clemson University Joe C. Paschal, Texas A&M University Gene Rouse, Iowa State University Bob Weaber, University of Missouri Tommy Wheeler, U.S. Meat Animal Research Center Steven Shackelford, U.S. Meat Animal Research Center Robert E. -
Niche Beef Production
ANR Publication 8500 | July 2014 http://anrcatalog.ucanr.edu Niche Beef Production Chapter 1. Introduction Larry C. Forero is University of his publication is a beginning resource for anyone who is interested in developing a niche California Cooperative Extension farm advisor, livestock and Tbeef marketing program. Here you will find information on finishing, processing, labeling, and natural resources, Shasta and marketing the niche beef product as well as case studies of beef enterprises that will help you better Trinity Counties; Glenn A. Nader understand the meat product you will be producing. is UCCE farm advisor, livestock and natural resources, Sutter, Traditional beef cattle operations are land-, labor-, and capital-intensive. Profit margins for traditional ranches that sell calves Yuba, and Butte Counties; Roger into the commodity trade are relatively low. A recent UC Cost study estimates a return over cash costs of approximately negative $20 per cow (Forero et al. 2008), and when the value of cattle is S. Ingram is UCCE farm advi- Cattle Price Adjusted for In ation adjusted for inflation, returns are even lower (Figure 1.1) (Forero 2002). 120 sor, livestock and range man- agement, Placer and Nevada The combination of high operation costs and relatively thin 100 Counties; and Stephanie Larson profit margins has led to increased interest in offering a value-added, 80 is UCCE farm advisor, live- ranch-raised product that will sell for higher prices. The scale of the stock and range management, operation can range from a few head to thousands of head per year. 60 Sonoma and Marin Counties. The availability of ranch-raised meat products has increased in recent $/cwt years, to where they are now found in natural food stores, restaurants, 40 and farmers’ markets. -
The Power of Economic Selection Indexes to Make Genetic Change in Profitability – Bullock Et Al...………
Beef Improvement Federation Annual Convention May 31 - June 3, 2017 Athens, Georgia May 31, 2017 Welcome to the Peach State! On behalf of the Georgia Cattlemen’s Association (GCA) and the University of Georgia (UGA), it is our pleasure to welcome you to the 49th Beef Improvement Federation Annual Meeting and Research Symposium. The annual BIF Meetings, as they are referred to by most of us, not only offer the opportunity to learn about the latest topics affecting beef cattle improvement and profitability, they also provide the chance to interact and network with leaders in several of the different areas that encompass beef improvement in both the U.S. and Canada. The conversations in the hallway have become a highlight for many that regularly attend these meetings as industry leaders, scientists, extension personnel, breed association and company personnel, and producers discuss and debate the future of beef cattle genetic improvement. The BIF Conference planning committee has worked hard to provide a program that will stimulate much thought and discussion. Most people associate Georgia with peaches, poultry and peanuts, but according to 2015 Georgia Farm Gate Value Report, beef cattle was the third leading agricultural commodity in the state in terms of farm gate receipts during 2015 and was ahead of both peanuts and peaches. It is important that beef cattle producers in Georgia and elsewhere continue to focus on key technologies, tools and strategies that allow them to be profitable and sustainable. It is our hope that those that attend this year’s meetings will take home information that will enhance their enterprises.