Federal Order Milk Pricing and the Economic Viability of the Upper Midwest Dairy Industry

University of Wisconsin-Madison Department of Agricultural Economics Marketing and Policy Briefing Paper Series Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison Cooperative Extension Service, University of Wisconsin-Extension Paper No. 47 April 1994 Federal Order Milk Pricing and the Economic Viability of the Upper Midwest Dairy Industry by Edward V. Jesse and Robert A. Cropp Copyright (c) 1994 by Edward V. Jesse and Robert A. Cropp. All rights reserved. Readers may make verbatim copies of this document for non-commercial purposes by any means, provided that this copyright notice appears on all such copies. Paper No. 47 April 1994 FEDERAL ORDER MILK PRICING AND THE ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF THE UPPER MIDWEST DAIRY INDUSTRY Ed Jesse and Bob Cropp1 Introduction Pronounced regional shifts in the location of U.S. dairying have occurred over the last two decades. The Northeast and the Upper Midwest states of Minnesota and Wisconsin dominated dairying during much of the post World War II period. These regions were the primary source of manufactured dairy products, with milk production in much of the rest of the U.S. limited to supplying local fluid and soft product needs. The market share of the Northeast began to decline in the 1970s, due in large part to increasing urbanization in some dairy areas in that region. Later, large gains in milk production in the Western and Southwestern U.S. caused the market share of the Upper Midwest region to fall, even though production continued to increase. But by the mid-1980s, the absolute level of milk production in the Upper Midwest began to decline. Combined with continued expansion in the West, this accelerated the region’s loss in share of the U.S. milk market (Figure 1). For Minnesota and Wisconsin, declining milk production is a serious economic threat. Dairy and other livestock represents the best use of much of the states’ land. Dairying is the major agricultural enterprise and contributes in a substantial way to the states’ economies, both directly and through related service and value added activities. Less milk means less income, fewer jobs, and more unutilized manufacturing capacity. In both states, government-university-private sector consortia have recognized the seriousness of the problem by initiating special programs to revitalize their dairy sectors: The Minnesota Dairy Initiative and the Wisconsin Dairy 2020 Project. These programs have addressed farm level constraints to more profitable dairy farming, encouraging the adoption of lower-cost production systems and management strategies and supporting state legislative changes to improve the economic climate for dairying. 1 Professors and Extension Dairy Marketing Specialists, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Figure 1 These efforts are appropriately-focused. Dairy farms in Minnesota and Wisconsin are, on average, much smaller than their counterparts in rapidly-growing dairy regions and have generally adopted yield-increasing production and management practices more slowly. Milk production per cow has fallen below the national average. There has been limited new investment, leading to wide-spread incidence of obsolete and outdated facilities. The region is not achieving full potential in milk production per cow. There has been excessive dependence on the historical model of dairy diversification -- combining dairy feed production with milk production -- with inadequate attention to the advantages of specialization. Entry into dairy farming has most often involved new farmers assuming the obsolete assets of retiring farmers, meaning that beginners often start off with a major obstacle to sustained profitability. Despite its apparent loss of regional competitiveness and resulting retrenchment, the region possesses many inherent attributes associated with profitable and sustainable dairying. The states are well positioned in terms of product mix. Most of the region’s milk is used to make cheese, which is the only major dairy product that has experienced large, sustained growth in per capita consumption in recent years. Minnesota and Wisconsin dairy products enjoy an excellent 2 consumer image that can be exploited through appropriate promotion and product differentiation. The region is favorably located relative to major eastern and midwestern population centers. There is an excellent, extensive dairy supply and service infrastructure in place. Feed costs are low because of relatively inexpensive land and good forage and grain producing capacity. There is an ample supply of good water. Good markets exist for cull dairy cattle. In light of these important advantages, what caused Minnesota and Wisconsin to lose their competitive dairy edge? The simple answer is that it is less profitable to produce milk in the Upper Midwest than it is in those regions where milk production is expanding. Low profits translate to the limited new investment, accelerated industry exit and the general malaise that is often observed in the region. Why are dairy profits low? The per-unit cost side of the dairy profit equation is affected by the farm-level characteristics noted above. Certainly, much can be done to reduce costs, and the dairy initiatives in Minnesota and Wisconsin are helping in that regard. Recent experience shows that new, larger dairy operations are very cost-competitive and profitable at current milk prices. However, cost-reducing strategies that would increase profitability require capital investments that often cannot be financed because of inadequate profitability on most existing operations and an overly cautious farm lending community. Moreover, costs of milk production in the region are not unusually high when compared to other regions (Table 1). In fact, cash costs in the Upper Midwest rank the lowest among seven regions defined by USDA in their regional dairy cost of production estimates. Economic costs, which include investment costs and a return to unpaid family labor, compare unfavorably with the Pacific region, but are competitive with the Southern Plains and below economic costs experienced in the other regions. However, because of relatively low milk prices, returns over economic costs have averaged substantially less than most other regions. Milk prices are the lowest for the Pacific region, but lower economic costs still nets a higher return over economic costs than for the Upper Midwest. While milk prices in Minnesota and Wisconsin are relatively low in comparison to most other regions of the United States, they are not the lowest. Figure 2 shows average state milk prices for 1992. Several states, all of them in the Western or Midwestern United States, had average milk prices lower than Minnesota and Wisconsin. Eight Western states (California, Idaho, New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, Wyoming, Washington, and Oregon) experienced a production-weighted average milk price in 1992 of $11.96 per hundredweight, which compares to $12.85 for Minnesota and $13.17 for Wisconsin. In total, these states increased milk production by 21.7 percent between 1988 and 1992. Meanwhile, Minnesota milk production fell by 5.4 percent and Wisconsin’s by 3.6 percent. Table 1. Regional Milk Production Costs and Receipts, Average, 1987-91 3 Gross Cash Economic Return over Return over Receipts Costs Costs Cash Costs Econ. Costs Dollars per Hundredweight Pacific 12.86 10.34 11.48 2.51 1.38 Upper Midwest 14.20 10.13 14.34 4.08 -0.14 Corn Belt 14.30 10.50 15.78 3.80 -1.47 Northeast 14.71 10.22 14.59 4.49 0.12 Appalachia 14.94 10.78 14.77 4.16 0.17 So. Plains 15.08 11.58 13.65 3.50 1.43 Southeast 16.59 12.66 14.44 3.93 2.15 Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Economic Indicators of the Farm Sector: Costs of Production--Major Fields Crops & Livestock and Dairy, 1991, ECIFS 11-3, February 1994. These are disturbing numbers for the Upper Midwest: Western states are expanding milk production rapidly in spite of milk prices that are lower than in Minnesota and Wisconsin. There is a clear and pressing need to control costs in order to compete with these low-cost regions. But at the same time, prices in some other expanding dairy regions are higher than experienced in the Upper Midwest despite similar or lower milk production costs. This has had a serious negative impact on the value of milk used for cheese, which accounts for the large majority of milk utilization in Minnesota and Wisconsin. Specifically, federal milk pricing rules have resulted in a situation where the volume of milk going to cheese production is being increased by subsidies created by federal milk marketing orders. These subsidies are the product of (a) single basing point pricing for fluid milk and (b) the use of Grade B milk prices in Minnesota and Wisconsin to establish minimum Grade A milk prices in other areas. The result of these subsidies is prices for milk used for cheese that are lower than would otherwise exist. State dairy initiatives cannot deal with this problem. It is national in scope. Yet it is a major factor contributing to unprofitable dairying in Minnesota and Wisconsin. Federal order pricing rules have also reduced the price competitiveness of Minnesota and Wisconsin cheesemakers in marketing cheese nationally, threatening the states’ dairy manufacturing sector. Unless regional pricing distortions are corrected, Minnesota and Wisconsin will continue to experience abnormal competitive pressures and diminished viability of dairy farming and dairy manufacturing in the region. 4 Figure 2 5 Federal Milk Marketing Orders Federal milk marketing orders regulate dairy plants (handlers) that market Grade A milk. Grade A milk is produced under monitored dairy farm sanitary conditions that qualify the milk for use in fluid dairy products. While Grade A milk is eligible for use in fluid products, most is used to produce manufactured products. Grade B milk, which is not regulated by federal orders, can only be used to make certain manufactured dairy products.

Load more