Riding Herd
“The greatest homage we can pay to truth is to use it.”
by LEE PITTS
– JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL
November 15, 2018 • www.aaalivestock.com
Volume 60 • No. 11
Cooking the Books BY LEE PITTS
O
nce a month, right on schedule cattle feeders, stocker operators, owners of video auction companies and livestock auction operators get all bleary eyed, start chewing their fingernails, have migraine headaches, are nauseous and can’t sleep. No, they haven’t contracted some kind of chronic cattle disease, they are just awaiting the Cattle on Feed report and wondering how far cattle prices will fall this time. Symptoms may also include diarrhea, ulcers and depression and it’s said there’s no known cure. And yet it’s a disease we give to ourselves.
It’s None of Their Business
NEWSPAPER PRIORITY HANDLING
I was taught quite early in my cattle career that you were never supposed to ask a rancher how many cattle he owned. That would be like asking you’re future father-in-law much money he has in the bank just before you ask for his daughter’s hand in marriage. I find it to be one of the great ironies in our business that once a month cattle feeders voluntarily spill their guts to the USDA about how many cattle they own so that this information can then be used against them. In no other industry is our government so nosey. Do they ask Apple how many I phones they have in inventory, or do they ask writers how many
Risk everything, fear nothing, have no regrets. words they plan to write next month? Does a professional poker player show all his cards to his competitors? Of course not, so why do we? Every week and every month our government issues hundreds of reports regarding the beef business. They range from reports on boneless cow beef trimmings, national steer and heifer estimated grading report, weekly cattle and beef numbers, monthly national grass fed beef report and on and on. I started but lost count at 200 such weekly and monthly USDA reports about cattle and feed, and
they all have an effect on cattle prices. What other industry telegraphs their intentions like this? And who do the reports really help, the cow/calf man, the cattle feeder, or the traders who at any one time may “own” six times more cattle than exist on the face of the earth and who may only own them for a millisecond?
Read the Small Print Take the Cattle on Feed survey for example. It’s conducted in the 16 largest cattle-feeding states which feed 98 percent
of the cattle in the U.S. and is compiled from information from 2,000 known cattle feeders with a capacity of 1,000 head or more. Those feeding at least 1,000 cattle produce 85 percent of all fed cattle in the U.S. According to the USDA, “The Cattle on Feed report includes information from sources believed to be reliable and accurate but no independent verification has been made and we do not guarantee its accuracy or completeness.” Then in even smaller print they say, “Opinions expressed are subject to change without notice. This report should not be construed as a request to engage in any transaction involving the purchase or sale of a futures contract and/or commodity option thereon. The risk of loss in trading futures contracts or commodity options can be substantial, and investors should carefully consider the inherent risks of such an incontinued on page two
As Ranchers Face Drought, USDA Cuts Back a Critical Program BY ALEX LEARY, WALL STREET JOURNAL
B
illy Elkins’ pickup rumbled through miles of barren rangeland and came to a stop near an old black cow. “She’s just thinner, not doing so good,” he said. “She’s going to go. She’ll be hamburger somewhere.” Western ranchers are suffering one of the worst droughts in decades, and this week Mr. Elkins is liquidating half his herd of 1,000. He has avoided even deeper losses by offsetting feed costs through a decade-old federal drought-insurance program, which he says has been a “game changer.” But in late August, the Trump administration stunned the ranching community here by unveiling plans to significantly scale back the insurance program in 2019, ratcheting up anxiety in farm communities already upset over retaliatory beef tariffs imposed by China after President Trump imposed levies on its products. “We’re probably some of his biggest supporters. It’s pissed off a lot of people,” said Mr. Elkins, 60 years old and fifth-generation rancher who raises Black Angus cattle on his 50,000-acre Rocking Chair Ranch. “As of right now, we’re not blaming him, but [it] could be a problem politically for the administration.” The White House declined to comment. The USDA said crop-insurance programs
are routinely evaluated and that the goal is to mitigate risk, not make ranchers whole. “Since premium is subsidized, over-insurance results in the producer getting more subsidy than was intended by law, and increasing the cost of the program to the taxpayers,” the department said in a statement. The pasture, rangeland and forage program is a hedge against drought. Ranchers pay a premium—half of which is subsidized by the government—and receive indemnities in times of low precipitation. They use those payments for hay and other supplemental feed or water. “It saved my ass big time,” said Roger Warner, 71, of the family-run Eureka Springs Cattle Co., in southeastern Arizona. In 2017, he paid $60,000 in premiums and got $150,000 in payments after seeing only about an inch of rain over the six-month period of his coverage. The money covered liquid supplement and protein blocks and helped compensate him for a dearth in calves due to poorly nourished cows. “If it rains, I have to pay. It’s not like it’s a freebie,” said Mr. Warner, who has contributed more this year than he has gotten. “I’d like an explanation.” While used across the country, the insurance has been most coveted in recent years continued on page four
Riding With The Big Boys
O
ne of the best perks about being a cow writer has been that it served as a gateway to visit many of the biggest and best ranches in America. The highlight came when I got to sleep in the legendary Big House at the King Ranch and dine at a table whose centerpiece was a big silver bowl awarded in 1943 to the seventh Triple Crown winner in history, the King Ranch’s own Assault. During a time when many cowboys are without cows and anyone with a good sized flower garden calls itself a “ranch”, I got to visit ranches in West Texas that were measured in sections, not acres, and anything less than 40 sections was considered a hobby farm. I climbed all over Arizona’s big spreads like the ORO’s, Pruett and Wray and John Wayne’s 26 Bar. I’ve written about many of California’s old land grant ranches and find it sad that I can think of only one that’s still in the same family it was granted to. I got to ride out with the cowboys for a branding on the Bell Ranch in New Mexico. At night we slept in our bedrolls and they told me to cover by boots with my cowboy hat so snakes or scorpions wouldn’t climb in them and surprise me the next morning. Every year I got to go to Nebraska’s Haythorn Ranch for a video sale and in Oregon I got to visit and write stories about Oregon’s MC and part of Peter French’s former empire. As part of Western Video Market I also got to take part in selling the cattle off many of the biggest spreads in the west like the 1,000 head lot of ZX calves we auctioned off in a grand total of 31 seconds. I’ve always been awed by the great cattle barons in history like Henry Miller of Miller and Lux who, it was said, could ride in his buggy from southern California into British Colombia and sleep on his own land every night. It was also said of the notorious tightwad that not once along the way would he eat his own beef because the beef he ate always wore
continued on page three
Page 2
Livestock Market Digest
November 15, 2018
COOKING THE BOOKS vestment in light of their financial condition.” So who uses the Cattle on Feed Report to their advantage the most? Futures traders, of course, who may not physically own one hoof of livestock. For the 45 plus years I’ve been writing about the cattle business ranchers have been complaining about the futures market and the damage it does. During all that time the USDA insisted that their on-feed reports were not being misused by traders. Nor did they have a downward drag on the market, at least according to the USDA. And if you believe that I’ve got some skinny, toothless barren cows to sell you for only $3,000 apiece.
High Noon Only now is the USDA coming clean. Earlier this year the USDA announced new procedures for the release of market-affecting crop and livestock reports from the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) “to ensure that all members of the public have access to the information at the same time.” According to the USDA, under the previous conditions the monthly Cattle on Feed report was released to the public at 12:00 p.m. (eastern time) but some members of the news media were allowed access to the data approximately 90 minutes early. They were provided an electronic copy of the report at 10:30 a.m and during the next 90 minutes the reporters were supposed to write their reports so they’d be ready to send to their papers at high noon. This 90 minute period was known as the “Lockup.” No electronic transmission devices or cell phones were supposedly permitted into lockup and once people entered the lockup they were not allowed to leave until
continued from page one
the reports were sent out to the public at high noon. Members of the general public were also allowed to enter lockup at 10:30 a.m. to sit in on the data briefing that occurred at 11:45 a.m. Says the USDA., “The public was not allowed to leave until 12:00 p.m. Lockup was open to any media outlet that met a set of strict standards and there were only six news services meeting those USDA standards. They were the Associated Press, Dow Jones/Wall Street Journal, Thompson Reuters, Market News Int’l/Deutsche Boerse, Bloomberg News, and DTN/Progressive Farmer. After reading the USDA’s own report it now sounds like some of the participants should have been LOCKED UP in a federal crossbar hotel somewhere making horsehair bridles for a lot longer than an hour and a half.
Coming Clean In the USDA’s own words, “Prompted by inquiries from the public, USDA examined the procedures and determined that technological advancements have afforded recipients of customized media reports a market advantage not enjoyed by members of the general public.” Said USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue, “These reports are greatly anticipated each time they are released, and they can have significant market impacts. Everyone who has interest in the USDA reports should have the same access as anyone else. Modern technology and current trading tactics have made microseconds a factor. This change addresses the ‘head start’ of a few microseconds that can amount to a market advantage.” “It takes USDA data roughly 2 seconds to be transmitted and posted for the public to read,” according to the USDA. “Meanwhile, press organizations have
Oops! We’re Sorry
You are never supposed to ask a rancher how many cattle he owns. access to high-speed fiber optic lines out of the USDA lockup and advertise paid services to clients that offer ‘ultra-low latency’ data transmission speed.” “There is evidence,” the USDA admitted, “to suggest that there was significant trading activity worth millions of dollars that occurred in the one to two second period immediately following 12:00 p.m., which could not be based on the public reading of USDA data. The inference is that private agents are paying the news agencies for faster data transmission to get a jump on the market.” According to the USDA, “New procedures will level the playing field and make the issuance of the reports fair to everyone involved.” Everyone now supposedly gets the On Feed Report at 12:00 p.m. on days the reports are released. “Media will no longer receive the reports in advance nor can they utilize high-speed transmission cables from within USDA’s lockup facility.” Speaking of lockups... there’s nothing like locking the barn door after all the horses have already vacated the premises.
CAREN COWAN..........Publisher
LEE PITTS....................Executive Editor
CHUCK STOCKS.........Publisher Emeritus RANDY SUMMERS......Sales Rep
RANDY SUMMERS, 505/850-8544 email: rjsauctioneer@aol.com
MARGUERITE VENSEL..Office Manager
JESSICA DECKER..........Special Assistance CHRISTINE CARTER......Graphic Designer
There’s always been a simple way to fix the problem of futures trading firms using the latest cutting edge technology to pick the pockets of cattle feeders and investors. The USDA could have simply issued all these reports during times the futures markets were closed. But being the most simple solution means it would be the very last answer the USDA would consider. As it is, the Cattle on Feed report is published on the third or fourth Friday of the month at 3 p.m. eastern time. Monthly grain reports are issued at noon during the CME Group grain trading sessions. Then about six months later when all the grain has been eaten and the steers killed the USDA comes out with their corrected and revised version of those first reports that crashed the cattle market at the time they were released. Oops! They’re so sorry about that! The real reason the government won’t issue all these reports during non-business hours is because investment houses and futures trading firms want “a tradeable report.” Meaning, if the USDA quit issuing all of these reports during trading hours the high frequency traders would have to find a new and different way to fleece investors. The USDA has indicated in the past that they are reviewing their schedules for 2019 and we may see some changes according to Dan Kerestes, NASS director of the statistics division. Jim Robb, an economist at the Livestock Marketing Information Center thinks the reports should be released outside of market hours, “Providing traders time to digest the data and give everybody time to deal with it.” Calvin Hui, a trader with Gator Trading Partners, admits “If the release of reports were moved to a time of day when markets are open ... I think that would benefit high frequency traders much more than end-users.” No kidding. It reminds me of stock traders in 1929 who took advantage of their customers when the stock ticker tape was two hours behind the actual action in the market. Customers who agreed to sell for one price got sold out for a pittance two hours later.
Doctoring the Data According to the USDA, “The Livestock Mandatory Reporting Act of 1999 established a market information program to provide market participants and others readily understandable information with respect to the marketing of livestock and their related products. The Act authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to make reasonable adjustments in information reported by packers that would distort market conditions or price levels to the detriment of market participants.” “Accordingly, Livestock and Grain Market News, through diligent and reasonable review
of the data provided by packers, publishes information representative of the livestock and meat traded and excludes those transactions from the reports that would distort general market conditions or price levels.” In other words, USDA toys with the data. It reminds me of every chicken and hog contract I’ve ever read. The price a contract grower receives for their animals is determined by the plant average. But before the plant average is finalized the highest priced animals are excluded from the average. Sneaky, aren’t they? How can you have an “average” when not all animals are inputted into the formula. It’s the same way with the USDA reports we read. By USDA’s own admission, “Information received from packers is automatically screened by the Livestock Mandatory Reporting electronic reporting program. Based on established criteria, certain transactions are flagged automatically by the program to be excluded during the generation of market reports.” The most common reasons transactions are excluded from publication are price aberrations notably lower or higher than the bulk of the market due to discounts or premiums. There are many other ways the USDA comes up with an “average” that is not really an average. For instance, for the daily cattle purchases of slaughter steers and heifers, “all transaction lots containing 10 head or less are excluded.” So the “average” prices the USDA reports are not really averages at all!
Dumb Data It might help you to think of the USDA reports as being just like political polls or voter surveys. And like those polls, evidence suggests that these USDA polls are becoming less and less accurate. According to an article last year by Robert Johansson and Anne Effland of the USDA and Keith Coble, Mississippi State University, “Farmer response rate to USDA surveys is dropping.” “USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service conducts a series of surveys throughout the year to assess farmer planting decisions and production conditions. Among other things, those surveys use farmer responses to estimate crop acreage and yields and provide early information on likely production outcomes for various crops in the current crop year.” And futures prices go up and down to a large extent based on these surveys. “The quality of the information and analysis provided from NASS data,” say the authors, “depends on a high level of producer participation in these surveys. But response rates on NASS crop acreage and production surveys have been falling in recent decades. From response rates of 80-85 percent in the early 1990s, rates have continued on page four
November 15, 2018
Livestock Market Digest
COOKING THE BOOKS fallen below 60 percent. “Of even greater concern, there appears to be an acceleration in the decline in the last 5 years or so, suggesting the possibility that this decline reflects a long-term permanent change. As the number of respondents falls, the statistical reliability of estimates and forecasts decline and the value of NASS estimates for a host of other purposes declines as well.” That means the prices you receive for your cattle are being determined by dumber and dumber data.
President Hillary A Memo to President Trump: If you’re looking for ways to cut
continued from page one
O B I T UA R Y
corners and save money there are a bunch of USDA economists and survey takers that could be fired at the NASS if we’d just discontinue a lot of these reports that hurt farmers and ranchers and only enrich the paper players on Wall Street and at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. After all, if ranchers really want to know what cattle are worth all they have to do is go to their local auction market or receive their market card. There they get accurate, transparent and timely data. They don’t need USDA surveys that are no more accurate than the ones that said Hillary would be President right now.
RIDING HERD a neighbor’s brand. I rode over ground once known as Swan Land and Cattle that was owned by a bunch of Scotsmen that covered 3,250,000 acres and had so many brands they had their own brand book. And I live within a couple hours drive from the epicenter of what was once known as the Kern County Land Company that operated in multiple states and was the largest ranch in the world at its height with 3,750,000 acres under its control. Folks around here just called it “the Land Company” and everyone knew who you were talking about. When we lived in New Mexico I often found myself on ground once owned by Maxwell Cattle Company that had 1,750,000 acres in New Mex-
Page 3
Ronald Jackson Joseph Archer passed away peacefully from natural causes on October 2, 2018. Born in St. Boniface, Canada, Ronald Jackson Joseph Archibald changed his name to Archer when he immigrated to Albuquerque in the 1970s. He lived a fascinating life filled with international experiences and hard work. During the Korean War, Ron served with the Canadian Navy and saw tours in the Pacific and Australia aboard the HMCS Ontario. During the Cold War, Ron served on the DEW Line as a Commissary Quartermaster, coordinating supplies to feed thousands of soldiers. Ron was an active member of the Albuquerque Press Club, and employed for many years at the Farmers & Ranchers Journal, and the Livestock Market Digest. Ron is survived by his wife, Cynthia Archer; his daughters, Shannon (Daniel), Kim (Kevin), Michelle, Sharon (Pete), Sandy (Wes), Debbie; son, Chad; brothers, Wayne and Neil; and sister, Darlene.
continued from page one
ico and Colorado and was so large the Atchison and Topeka Railroad had six stations on the ranch. The Chiricahua Cattle Company was on the San Carlos Apache Reservation and ran 45,000 head of cattle at one time! They were known simply as “the Cherries”. I always wondered how they could possibly run on so many acres or look after so many cows. I was always of the belief that you should never run more cows than your wife could take care of. Another famous Texas ranch I enjoyed writing about was the 101 Ranch that had its own wild west show. Few people knew it was so named because it consisted of 101,000 acres. Whenever I visited one of these monster ranches I always felt intimidated and felt I had
to somehow justify my little 100 head cow/calf operation and somehow try to compete with them. I remember horseback riding on a huge Arizona border spread with the owner who told me, “I’ve got so many cattle there are thousands here that have never felt a rope around their neck.” “Yeah,” I commiserated, “that’s the quality of ropers I get at my place too.” And I remember being on another huge Texas ranch in the Permian basin whose owner told me, “My place is so big it takes three days to ride around it.” Not to be outdone, I said, “Yeah, I had a pickup like that once too.” wwwLeePittsbooks.com
Page 4
CUTS in the West. The “four corners” area of Arizona, Utah, Colorado and New Mexico is in “extreme” or “exceptional” drought, according to government data. Statewide over the past year, Arizona has seen half its average precipitation. Navajo County, home to Snowflake, is going through its second-driest year in a more than a century. The easygoing Mr. Elkins lamented a landscape barren as far as the eye can see, stripped of the knee-high grass that would normally sustain his herd. He has used the insurance payments to truck in 200 tons of hay in the past two years, which he says is hardly enough. The USDA isn’t eliminating the program, but in many areas it has sharply reduced how much forage is worth on a given acre, arguing the values used today to determine payouts are artificially high. Some ranchers in Arizona, who reject that reasoning, could see cuts of 40 percent or more. The program began in 2007 and expanded nationally during the Obama administration. Today, there are almost 99 million acres covered—24 million alone in Arizona—and the net government cost has gone from $14 million to $136 million, a fraction of the billions in annual farm subsidies. Nearly 33,000 policies were sold in 2018. “This is a valuable program and I want it to be around 10 to 20 years from now, so I think the changes they are making will help it last,” said Brandon Willis, a former USDA official who was involved with the expansion. “It is quite a shock, there’s no doubt about it,” he said of the cutback. Secretary Perdue hasn’t
Livestock Market Digest continued from page one
responded to the Sept. 18 letter from a bipartisan group of U.S. House members that called for no changes in 2019 while concerns about the program were being evaluated. One concern within the administration is preventing people without cattle from buying the insurance. Ranchers who have been consulted by the USDA’s Risk Management Agency—which operates the insurance program— say certification of cattle ownership will be part of next year’s program, among other tweaks. “We felt like we were stabbed in the back by the RMA folks after having a lot of communication with them,” said Jay Whetten, president of the Arizona Cattle Growers’ Association. He said that while ranchers have never sought the kind of programs other farm sectors have long relied on. “People out here in the West, we don’t believe that Washington hardly ever gets it right,” Mr. Whetten said. “It’s ‘get out of my way, leave me alone so I can make a living.’ But this drought-assistance program has been a very good and effective program.” In Snowflake, Mr. Elkins gave a tour of his ranch after spending hours on horseback rounding up cattle for sale. “The weather is your livelihood and if you don’t get moisture it can be crushing,” he said. “I haven’t seen it this bad in my lifetime.” As it happened, a couple of inches of rain had fallen a few days earlier, some of it forming muddy puddles on the dirt road and spurring some grass growth on the periphery. But Mr. Elkins is already moving to cut his losses and selling half the herd. “It’s too late,” he said.
November 15, 2018
Selecting Heifers With Confidence BY IBBA MEMBER RELATIONS SPECIALIST MACEE PRAUSE
T
here is a new DNA-assisted test available exclusively through the International Brangus Breeders Association (IBBA) for Brangus®commercial cattle. Igenity® Brangus is a genomic profiler for Brangus commercial cattle that aims to provide cattlemen with more confident selection, breeding and management of superior replacement heifers. It permits selection decisions to be made at a younger age allowing the cattleman the opportunity to save money on heifer development. “It allows them to select animals that are going to meet the goals of the operation and see what they actually have and direct their buying,” explained Neogen Beef Genomics Territory Manager Jill Ginn. “Whichever trait they are short or a little low on, they can better select bulls for these traits when purchasing.” Using one-to-10 trait ranking scores, with the three available Brangus indices, you will be able to improve traits in your herd faster. Additionally, producers can confirm parentage and carcass tenderness traits in breeding stock and showcase herd quality using DNA results when marketing. “Curiosity more than anything,” Arlie Beckendorf, of Beckendorf Ranch, stated, “I wanted to see what my herd might be producing.” With improved prediction, Igenity Brangus can save you years on your herd improvement goals. Miguel Soto, Costa Rican Brangus breeder, said, “We do believe in our own selection. We decided to use it, because we wanted to have that additional tool. We saw American breeds and other breeds move to use [Igenity], and we wanted to research how it was being used in the American market.” To order the Igenity Brangus profiler, producers must simply collect DNA samples when handling cattle, such as at branding, processing or vaccination. Fast, clean, easy DNA sampling like Allflex Tissue Sampling Units (TSU) are recommended. The Igenity Brangus DNA order form may be completed online at gobrangus.com/igenity-brangus, and DNA samples should be sent to IBBA. Approximately 28 days after lab receipt, the producer will receive an emailed report that ranks tested animals on an easy-to-read one-to-10 scale for maternal, growth and carcass traits including tenderness, the Brangus Built Index, the Maternal Economic Index, the Terminal Economic Index, SeekSire parentage, and content on how to interpret the results. “Typically, there is no incentive to produce a more tender animal in today’s market,
but ultimately we do select for [tenderness],” stated Ginn. “If we do not produce a tender, good-quality product to consumers, they will stop purchasing beef.” “[The tenderness trait] will influence the product a lot but not necessarily the producer,” Beckendorf added. “By providing a better product for the consumer, I would make adjustments, selecting sires that offer the best tenderness traits.” “Little by little, the markets are going toward tender beef,” Soto said. “It is currently a trait not being paid to the producer, but [tenderness] is important to the consumer. It is, unfortunately, a trait overlooked at the time.” Ranked traits include calving ease direct, calving ease maternal, maternal weaning weight, scrotal circumference, weaning weight, yearling weight, intramuscular fat, ribeye area, fat thickness, and tenderness. The Brangus Built Index provides an equal weighing of maternal traits and carcass traits. You can use the report to select which heifers to keep, which to market as feeders, and to identify herd qualities upon which you strive to improve. “[Igenity Brangus can benefit the commercial cowman] through sire selection, if you know what the DNA status is for a dam then you can make decisions about keeping a replacement heifer,” said Beckendorf. “If I am marketing steers, even though I’m not taking them to the rail, I can improve the [ribeye area] and get a better price, including marketing commercial bulls.” “Our situation is a little different as we are a tropical environment, different from the American environment and market,” Soto explained. “Select for what the market wants and what your environment allows. We are maniacs about measuring all the data. So, we have all the data about the animal’s time from the ranch, including phenotypic, and we use the genetics as an additional tool to better understand how it correlates. It is not the only selection tool, but an additional tool.” Future product develop-
ments with Neogen include building a “Brangus Dashboard,” which will allow commercial cattlemen an online area to store and interpret their results. “The Brangus producers will be able to login to the dashboard and view all their results when they get them. They will be able to compare multiple years together and benchmark the data,” described Ginn. “Also, they can create a custom index [comprised of their herd’s selection traits] in addition to having the static indices. Further, they can manipulate and work with the data for information they want to make decisions off.” “It would be terrific to give the flexibility for us to pick the traits we select for and are useful to our production,” Soto affirmed. “For us, scrotal circumference is a must!” Additionally, IBBA aims to continuously improve upon current products available to producers and strives to meet the commercial cattlemen’s goals for genetic improvement. The Igenity Brangus DNA testing method is a newer technology available to Brangus producers that, Beckendorf stated, will “depend on how serious they will be about improving their operations.” Commercial cattlemen continue to desire other DNA solutions, technological advancements, and other production efficiencies. “A critical trait for me is disposition, along with the other main traits provided,” Beckendorf said. Adaptation and heat tolerance are additional visual inspection traits that Brangus producers look at during evaluation that are difficult to measure. “Length of hair impacts our program as it is very hot,” explained Soto. “We need animals that will first adapt then see if they will be able to perform. If they have the performance traits but cannot adapt, it is not useful. A key attribute judged by bull buyers is if there is long hair or the animal is not behaving well in the heat, they will not buy that bull no matter the genetics or pedigree.”
November 15, 2018
Livestock Market Digest
American Brahman Breeders Association Hires New Executive Vice President
T
he American Brahman Breeders Association Board of Directors is proud to announce that Ashley Hughes has been selected as the new Executive Vice President of the American Brahman Breeders Association. With a resume that includes association leadership and management positions with organizations including the Florida Cattlemen’s Association, Florida Beef Council, Georgia Cattlemen’s Association and Georgia Beef Board, Ms. Hughes has also served in the primary operations management and cattle procurement roles for feedlot/preconditioning yards in Florida and Georgia. “The selection of Ashley Hughes as the new Executive Vice President for our Association is a decision that will ensure the longevity of our breed association, create new opportunities for our members and youth, and help us continue to solidify our unique role in the cattle industry in the United States and around the world,” said George Kempfer, President of the American Brahman Breeders Association. “With her incredible background and experience, her creative and exciting approach to operations management and her impeccable record of producing results, we agree that Ms. Hughes is an invaluable addition to the ABBA team.” “I am incredibly honored to receive this appointment for such an outstanding Association,” said Ashley Hughes, Executive Vice President of the American Brahman Breeders Association. “My goals include cultivating an atmosphere of community and productivity to enable our membership to conduct profitable business, increase communication at all levels and work with ABBA leaders to update the strategic plan and the goals of the Association. I am proud to partner with such an incredible, knowledgeable Board of Directors to benefit not only our membership, but the Brahman breed as a whole.” In addition to daily operations, Ms. Hughes is responsible for inspiring and leading focus toward accomplishing ABBA goals, bringing a working knowledge of the livestock industry and the role of American Brahman cattle within the industry, having an understanding of modern registry and performance programs and all aspects of the recordation and management of such data involved.
Baxter BLACK ON THE EDGE OF COMMON SENSE www.baxterblack.com
Cowboy Mentality
I
ran into Randy in the airport. He was draggin’ his right hind leg like an escaped convict tryin’ to cover his tracks. I could see it had taken him a while to pull his pant leg on over the swollen knee. He side-slid to a stop to visit for a minute. “So.” I asked stupidly, “Hurt yourself?” Randy is a rodeo announcer. A good one, I might add. I’ve seen him work. But this injury could certainly not be worked related, I thought to myself. Rodeo announcers are a little higher up the food chain than those of us who actually get within
striking distance of large herbivores. They sit in their ivory towers above the dust and flailing hooves, inciting the fans and titillating the timers. Occasionally stooping to act as straight man to the barrel man’s jokes but above it all, maintaining their dignity. Ringmaster of all they survey. He gave me a raised eyebrow, realized that I was not smart enough to have asked the question facetiously, and explained. In an effort to ‘keep up with the competition’ he had taken to announcing rodeos ahorseback. ‘Say no more,’ I thought. Rid-
Page 5 ing a strange horse furnished by the stock contractor into the center of the arena surrounded by thousands of foot stompin’, whistlin’, avid rodeo fans, reins in one hand, microphone in the other, with flags flyin’, banners flappin’ and music blarrin’...the outcome is almost predictable. His story included all of that and concluded with a wild bucking exit where he bailed out with the grace of a sand bag fallin’ off the back of a runaway stage coach. What makes people do things like that says something about the cowboy mentality. This mentality is best characterized by that old joke where the guy holds his hand in front of his face and bets his friend that he can’t ‘hit my hand before I move it.’ I once had to wear a neck brace for several weeks. Not in public, of course. Maybe I wouldn’t have been so reluctant to wear it if I didn’t have to respond to the question...”So, did you hurt your neck?” What did I tell them? No. It’s just decorative. A cosmetic arti-
cle of clothing designed to offset my bad posture and enhance my fine facial features. Or maybe... my wife gave it to me on our anniversary...or, I wrenched it saving a school bus load of children from a burning building. If I had been forced to explain, I would have to have said I was riding down the trail with an amigo whose horse was jiggin’ and tossin his head. So I told this amigo that he didn’t have to put up with that kind of unsavory equine behavior. When he throws his head, I said, conk him between the ears. ‘Whattya mean?’ asked my amigo. So I demonstrated by leaning out of the saddle and whacking his horse on the poll with a 32 oz mug I’d got at the GIT AND GO. The mug broke, his horse stampeded and when I straightened up, I couldn’t move my neck. See what I mean? Randy’s story isn’t that preposterous after all. Just part of the cowboy way. Here, bet you can’t hit my hand before I move it. www.baxterblack.com
Page 6
Livestock Market Digest
November 15, 2018
Carcass Merit & Meat Quality in Bos Indicus Influenced Cattle BY RALUCA MATEESCU, PHD., UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
T
he U.S. Beef Quality Audit identified low and inconsistent quality as major impediments to improving domestic demand for beef products. Consumers evaluate the quality of beef at the point of purchase with respect to freshness, marbling and color. Consumers evaluate the quality of beef at the point of consumption, where the focus is on quality of eating experience or palatability described by three sensory traits: tenderness, juiciness and flavor. Ability to deliver a consistently superior quality product is important if the beef industry is to maintain
and expand its share of the market. The strength shown by the high-quality branded-beef market in the last few years confirms that a sizable proportion of consumers are willing to pay for assured quality, indicating that the importance of quality is only going to increase going forward. Meeting and exceeding quality expectations will be needed to maintain or even increase market share. Even more important for the future of the industry is expanding the consumer base. As the average income increases, new consumers will enter the beef market, and the eating quality these new consumers experience will largely determine if they will continue to demand beef. Improving eating quality is critical to convince both habitual and new consumers of the superior value they are getting from the money spent on beef. Tenderness is the most important sensory attribute consumer’s use to judge beef quality and is a major focus in my research program at the University of Florida. The USDA grading system, established in 1996, is based on marbling and maturity and is used to separate beef carcasses into groups with uniform quality. In the absence of any other system, the beef industry is using the USDA grading system to determine premium and discounts, to predict the palatability of the meat from a beef carcass, and to communicate it to the consumers. Although the USDA grading system has served the industry well, changes in consumers’ preferences, limitations in the ability of the system to predict eating quality, and limited consumer understanding of how the system works are some of the problems associated with using this system as indicator of palatabil-
ity. By comparison, beef is an expensive animal protein and what sets it apart are its distinctive sensory attributes leading to a unique eating experience. Programs to improve eating experience when consuming beef and the ability to better predict the eating quality level for marketing purposes are critical to increase consumers’ confidence that quality expectations are met. Management and genetic programs designed to address these issues and management practices that positively or negatively influence eating experience need to be developed. To analyze the relationship between the USDA quality grade and the degree of tenderness, I used a dataset of 3,125 animals spanning the range from 100-percent Angus to 100-percent Brahman. In this data set, 1,378 were Brangus® animals. The phenotypes of interest were tenderness assessed by Warner-Bratzler shear force (WBSF) and USDA quality grade. The WBSF is an objective measure of tenderness, and it measures the force required to shear a cooked steak in kilograms (kg). The lower the number, the less force is required – indicating a more tender steak. The USDA-Agricultural Marketing Service (USDA-AMS) is engaged in designing standards to indicate the degree of tenderness for beef. In this program, a steak with a WBSF less than 4.2 kg is considered tender, and a steak with WBSF less than 3.7 kg is considered very tender. The average WBSF for the population used in this study was 4.49 kg and, using the USDA-AMS standard, 42.8 percent of our animals would be considered tough, 11 percent tender, and 46.2 percent would qualify as very tender. Based on USDA grading
Take your marketing program to the top! Advertise to Cattlemen and Ranchers! Contact
Randy Summers
ADVERTISING REPRESENTATIVE
Office: 505/243-9515Cell: 505/850-8544
randy@aaalivestock.com • rjauctioneer@aol.com
system, cattle in our data were classified as 7.4 percent Standard, 44.1 percent Select, 33.1 percent Choice-, 11 percent Choice, 3.3 percent Choice+ and 1.1 percent Prime. Table 1 shows the tenderness classification of steaks from different quality grades based on the WBSF measurement. For example, 65.37 percent of the cattle graded Standard were graded as very tender, 7.79 percent as tender and 26.84 percent as tough, based on the WBSF. The scatterplot in Figure 1 shows the distribution of our cattle across these quality grades and their respective toughness or tenderness measured by WBSF. There are three important points to take from this figure: There is considerable variation in the degree of tenderness across all quality grades. There is a small trend in the average tenderness across quality grades, described by the red line, indicating that, on average, steaks from higher quality grades tend to be more tender, or have lower WBSF. However, it is also clear that, most of the variability in tenderness is within quality grades and not between grades. The tenderness of steaks from carcasses graded Select or Choice, which was the majority of our animals, varied from very tender to very tough. This highlights the limitation of the USDA grading system to predict eating quality or tenderness. On the right side of the graph, for steaks graded higher as Choice or Choice+, about 43 percent are in fact tough, based on WBSF. Consumers buying these steaks are paying a premium, and they expect a high-quality product, but 43 percent of the time, they will end up with a tough steak and, therefore, a less-than-desirable eating experience. This, in the long run, will translate into decreased beef demand, negatively impacting all sectors of the beef industry. On the left side of the graph, 63 percent of the steaks from carcasses graded Standard or Select are in fact tender or very tender. Consumers buying these steaks are paying a lower price, purchasing a very tender steak that will provide a very positive eating experience. This is great for the consumer and will help increase beef demand, but this is an opportunity loss for the producers as they are selling a high-quality product for a lower, or even discounted, price. Although no errors are desirable, from the consumer and marketing point of view, errors may have different consequences. We could speculate that misclassification errors for moderately tender group have relatively small market consequences, because if the price of the product reflects eating quality, as it would with a “certified
tender” program, the consumer is paying and expecting average eating quality and this expectation is most likely met. On the other hand, misclassifications of a product with “tough” or “tender” quality may have a greater negative impact on consumers. Again, if we assume the eating quality is positively associated with the price of the product, not meeting quality expectations leads to dissatisfied consumers. This could have important consequences as past experience is a critical factor regarding attitude toward food. A report (SMART, 1994) evaluating the factors contributing to the intent of consumers to repurchase a product concluded that eating quality was the most important factor at 65 percent, followed by price at 28 percent. Unfulfilled eating quality expectations lead to consumers’ dissatisfaction, reduced future beef purchases and lower demand. The negative consequences associated with misclassifications of carcasses with “tender” into “moderately tender” or “tough” groups are of different nature. These errors represent opportunity losses for the industry, as the product is undervalued. Programs to improve eating experience when consuming beef and the ability to better predict the eating quality level for marketing purposes are critical to increase consumers’ confidence and, subsequently, improve the economic position of the beef industry through increased demand for beef products. All the components defining eating quality are quantitative traits, controlled by many genes and impacted by environmental factors. These traits are not available until late in life or after the animal has been harvested, and measuring them is difficult and expensive. Improving these traits through traditional phenotypic selection is impractical. Genomic selection using genetic markers that account for a worthwhile proportion of variation to improve provide a viable alternative. Warner-Bratzler Shear Force and the intramuscular fat content (IMFC) were identified from an extensive set of carcass and meat composition traits to be the best predictors of eating quality (Mateescu et al., 2016). Those indicator traits are difficult to measure on live animals. An important objective of our research is to develop DNA tests that can accurately identify cattle with superior genetics for WBSF and IMFC to be used by the industry to address these issues. Knowledge of the genetics controlling these traits along with a precise understanding of the biological networks and interactions underlying the meat quality complex will increase the ability of the industry respond to consumer expectations.
November 15, 2018
Livestock Market Digest
The View
I’m Protesting Not!
The views expressed in this column are not necessarily those of the publisher
I
just do not understand it, but can you imagine visiting the halls of the United States Congress and acting like a fool? I was taken aback by the Brett Kavanaugh hearing and the misbehavior of the dissenting side. I do not think I have ever seen such hate and vitriol aimed at an appointee. I guess what bothers me the most is that some congressmen from the opposing side were encouraging people to act like nuts and there were people that actually listened to them. The US Congress is not a good example that you should follow, nor has it ever been that I can remember. Once in awhile they become respectable. However, when you are their guest
you need to be respectful of the institution. Personally, I am sick of “protesters”! I’m well aware that people have a right to protest, but it is getting out of hand. Stop and think about it. How much intelligence does it take to carry a sign and/or act like a fool in public? Wouldn’t it be more beneficial to your cause to put the same time and effort into effecting actual change? It looks to me like only the “lazy” protest. From what I understand you can even get paid to protest, whether you believe in the cause or not. However, if you have a legitimate job, a family to support, or if you have livestock to attend to, then you
have no time to protest. There are exceptions of course, such as Mayor Di Blasio of New York City. Remember, he had time to go over to Germany and protest the G-20 Summit in July of 2017, which he must have deemed more important than taking care of the citizens of New York City. I do not understand how you can take on someone else’s fight when you do not have your own house in order. The bottom line is that it is much easier to be a protester than it is to try and achieve change through proper channels. The other thing that flabbergasts me is why people were so intent on destroying. One thing the left knows is that it is easy to work people into a frenzy over emotional issues. They use this tactic well, but certainly failed in their quest to stop the judge from being confirmed. I can remember being in Mexico when Portillo was President and he wanted to open a nuclear plant there. For a month ahead of the opening he had representatives out giving money, transportation, and blankets to poor people, so they would line the streets and cheer as his motorcade passed by on the way to the plant. Most had
Page 7
no idea why they were cheering, but happy they could eat. In my view, similar tactics were used to gather anti-Trump protesters. The Women’s March on Washington and across the US back in January of 2017 is another disaster. How can anyone take you seriously when you are dressed up as female genitalia? I cannot believe that some of those ladies were mothers. Why would you want to set that example for your children? It is beyond me. There are lots of things that I don’t like about The US Congress, The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, The American Quarter Horse Association, or any other organization that I happen to belong to. I certainly don’t mind pointing things out that need to be addressed, but there are ways to get things done and still maintain your dignity. I still maintain that most people are “good” and that most organizations are trying to do the right things for their members. If I were ever going to start a protest, which I NEVER would, it would be against the Beef Checkoff and the lack of Country Of Origin Labeling. To me those are two things
that hurt the small cattleman. They are just so anti-American. Why wouldn’t the American rancher want country of origin labeling? The trouble is obvious, that meat packers control the cattle business and the ranchers are not even close. The new NAFTA deal, now known as USMCA may address this issue as it is still a deal in progress. Hopefully, this will be accomplished. Maybe all the ranchers should drive all their cattle to the steps of the US Congress to protest. While they are at it, they can hire all the derelicts they can find to go with the cattle. Perhaps they can lay down in front of traffic and block the roadways. Come on folks, this is just about as silly as the anti-Trumpers act, so we are NOT going to do it. Dignity is a wonderful thing which will get you much further in life than any kind of blatant stupidity. Respecting each other goes a long way to maintaining order and a good lifestyle for all. Hating does no one any good, neither to the hater nor the hated. My message here is, put your hatred away, criticize constructively, and act like you are setting an example for your peers. Keep on the sunny side!
U.S. Ag Secretary Appoints Ellis to National Advisory Board
N
oble Research Institute Industry Relations and Stewardship Manager Chad Ellis has been selected to serve on the United States Department of Agriculture’s National Agricultural Research, Extension, Education and Economics (NAREEE) Advisory Board under the direction of U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue. Ellis is one of 10 new appointees who will serve three-year terms. He represents national conservation or natural resource
groups as outlined in the Agricultural Act of 2014. At the Noble Research Institute, Ellis manages industry relations and land stewardship efforts to advocate and promote the benefits of agricultural production with a focus on stewardship. “Our success hinges on forming collaborative relationships with other like-minded organizations throughout the agriculture sector to further address challenges that face regional and national agriculture,” Ellis said.
“It’s an honor to be selected to represent national conservation and natural resource groups and to continue our national efforts to keep working lands productive and intact for years to come.” The NAREEE Board regularly advises Secretary Perdue and land-grant colleges and universities on top national priorities and policies related to food and agricultural research, education, extension, and economics. The board’s main objective is to contribute to effective federal agri-
People Are Paying $300 to Cuddle Cows. Here’s Why BY LINNEA ZIELINSKI / METRO. US/BODY-AND-MIND
B
elieve it or not, people are now shelling out $300 for two people to spend 90 minutes cuddling, brushing and playing with cows. The wellness trend is simply called cow cuddling, and it’s the most recent addition to animal-centric holistic health offers, like goat yoga. If you’re still reeling from sticker shock it might be because you’re from the Midwest and used to petting cows on nearby farms as they hang their heads over the fence — for free. But though the dough you’ll need to drop might seem high, the health treatment is in fact rooted in at least some science. Here’s why people are dropping serious cash on cow cuddling.
What is cow cuddling? First of all, cow cuddling is just what it sounds like, though not all you’ll do is cuddle the cows. A cow cuddling experience, as previously mentioned,
also includes other activities like petting the cows and playing with them, and no, they won’t put you to work milking them while you’re there. Sessions tend to be monitored and facilitated by a licensed counselor (more on that in a minute) and an equine specialist.
Are there health benefits to cow cuddling? Actually, yes, and the health benefits that experts claim cow cuddling provides might make it a good alternative for people who just can’t get into meditation. One of the many benefits to meditation is the ability to slow down your heart rate, which can work wonders for alleviating or even banishing anxiety. Cow cuddling can do the same thing, according to Mountain Horse Farm, a wellness retreat that offers this experience. “Cows have a body temperature that is slightly higher than humans and their heart rate is lower than ours,” the retreat explains on their website. “Cud-
dling up with a cow, feeling that lower heart rate and higher body temperature, is very relaxing.” Think of it as therapy that doesn’t require you to say a word. “They will pick up on what’s going on inside and sense if you are happy, sad, feel lost, anxious or are excited and they will respond to that without judgement, ego or agenda,” the Mountain Horse Farm website explains. They’re sensitive, intuitive creatures, they explain, which makes them perfect for sensing your emotions and responding to your subtle body language.
Where can I try cow cuddling? If you happen to live in NYC, you can try cow cuddling and get out of the hectic city all in one go. Mountain Horse Farm (mentioned above) in update New York offers the experience as we outlined, and as described, a 90-minute session for two will cost you $300.
cultural research, education and economics programs through broad stakeholder feedback and sound science. Board members also perform an annual review of the relevance of and adequacy of funding for those programs. “Chad is a knowledgeable advocate for conservation and land stewardship issues,” said Bill Buckner, Noble Research Institute president and CEO. “He is effective in communicating those issues to farmers, ranchers, landowners and others in the agriculture industry. Agriculture’s deep connections to the economy, society and the land make it one of the most important frontiers for stewardship. Today, we continue to research ways that land stewardship and markets promote creative conservation
Noble Research Institute Industry Relations and Stewardship Manager Chad Ellis has been selected to serve on the United States Department of Agriculture’s National Agricultural Research, Extension, Education and Economics (NAREEE) Advisory Board.
and reward private landowners who conserve the public interest.”
Page 8
Livestock Market Digest
November 15, 2018
Grid Masters Capitalize on Value-Added Marketing to Capture Carcass Premiums
T
he Grid Master Award, an honor bestowed by the Red Angus Association of America, is earned by operations that have successfully combined superior Red Angus genetics, skillful feeding and precise marketing to achieve success with the slaughter of superior beef carcasses. Harold Bertz, RAAA commercial marketing programs coordinator, announced the recipients. “The Grid Master Award truly rewards the combination of artful breeding, precise feeding and focused marketing in cre-
ating elite beef carcass results. This year’s 1,322 head of Grid Master cattle exemplified Red Angus’ ability to achieve top quality and yield grades. The award-winning 22 loads averaged 66 percent Prime and upper 2/3 Choice, with 61 percent of the cattle at Yield Grades 1 and 2,” said Bertz. To be named a Grid Master, entries must be Red Angus or Red Angus-influenced cattle enrolled in the RAAA’s Feeder Calf Certification Program or the Allied Access tag program, and must achieve a specified
level of carcass excellence. The program is open to both conventionally and naturally fed cattle. Conventionally fed Red Angus cattle must be marketed in lots of at least 30 head, reach a minimum of 85 percent Choice and Prime, have a maximum of 5 percent Yield Grade 4s and a minimum grid score of 100. Naturally fed Red Angus cattle must also be marketed in lots of 30 head or more, achieve 90 percent Choice and Prime, with a maximum of 10 percent Yield Grade 4s and a minimum grid
score of 100. Firms receiving Grid Master honors include the following: Conventionally Fed Division Anderson Land and Cattle, Oberlin, Kansas, earned Grid Master honors on two loads, home fed. Chain Ranch, Canton, Oklahoma, fed at Cattleman’s Choice Feedyard, Inc., Gage, Oklahoma. DeLong Ranches, Inc., Winnemucca, Nevada, fed at Whitham Farms Feedyard, Leoti, Kansas. Hayes Red Angus, Jetmore, Kansas, fed at Boothill Feeders, Jetmore, Kansas. Hueftle Cattle Company, Cozad, Nebraska, earned Grid Master honors on four loads, home fed. Kniebel Cattle Company, White City, Kansas, home fed. Pelton Red Angus, Burdett, Kansas, fed at Anderson Land and Cattle, Oberlin, Kan-
sas. Prairie Dog Creek Cattle, Dresden, Kansas, earned Grid Master honors on two loads, home fed. Toedtli Ranch, Stoneham, Colorado, fed at Croissant Farms, Inc., Johnstown, Colorado. JYJ Red Angus, Columbia, Alabama, fed at Hy-Plains Feedyard, LLC, Montezuma, Kansas. Naturally Fed Division Christensen Brothers, Weldona, Colorado, earned Grid Master Honors on two loads, home fed. Harris Ranch, Drewsey, Oregon, earned Grid Master honors on two loads, fed at Beef Northwest Feeders, Boardman, Oregon. Leon Tuttle, Gove, Kansas, fed at Witt Enterprises, Flagler, Colorado. Wagonhound Land and Livestock, Douglas, Wyoming, home fed.
Vitamins, Part of Doing the Right Thing BY JERA PIPKIN / FEEDING QUALITY FORUM
L
ike pieces of a puzzle, vitamins are essential in keeping cattle healthy year-round. Price spikes in the last year, however, have producers taking another look at how to fit savings into concerns about source and efficacy over time. Jeff Heldt, with Micronutrients Intellibond, explored cost-effective vitamin and mineral strategies at the Certified Angus Beef ® (CAB®) brand’s Feeding Quality Forum this summer in Sioux City, Iowa. “Obviously, we all want to take care of our animals and do
the right thing,” he said. “But also, we need to think about our competitive advantage. Where can I save some dollars, or maybe where can I spend a few more dollars to make sure I’m doing the right thing?” Heldt’s comments were against a backdrop of recent shortages. Vitamin A prices skyrocketed 10-fold last fall after fire damaged a German factory that made precursors of A and E. The market finally returned to normal, after much study of alternatives. He drew a parallel to the industry’s rethinking phosphate continued on page eleven
November 15, 2018
Livestock Market Digest
Page 9
For Real Estate and Classified Advertising Please Call 505/243-9515
REAL ESTATE GUIDE
SOCORRO PLAZA REALTY On the Plaza
Donald Brown
Qualifying Broker
521 West Second St., Portales, NM 88130
575-226-0671 www.buenavista-nm.com
Rural Listings with Homes & Barns in Eastern New Mexico 2638 S Rrd G, 160 ac very nice ranch setting near Causey, NM 361 S Rrd W, 38 ac w/ 3bdrm, 2 bth home 7 mi west Portales, NM 1866 NM 236, 10 ac w/4 bdrm 2 bth, barns, storage – 2 miles from town 1509 Davis Rd, very nice home, lots garage – barn space – 3 miles out 1242 NM 480, fantastic ranch home on 58 ac overlooking Portales
SOLD
See these and other properties at www.buenavista-nm.com
O’NEILL LAND, llc P.O. Box 145, Cimarron, NM 87714 • 575/376-2341 • Fax: 575/376-2347 land@swranches.com • www.swranches.com
WAGONMOUND RANCH, Mora/Harding Counties, NM. 4,927 +/- deeded acres, 1,336.80 +/- state lease acres, 2,617 +/- Kiowa National Grassland Lease Acres. 8,880.80 +/- Total Acres. Substantial holding with good mix of grazing land and broken country off rim onto Canadian River. Fenced into four main pastures with shipping and headquarter pasture and additional four pastures in the Kiowa lease. Modern well, storage tank and piped water system supplementing existing dirt tanks located on deeded. Located approximately 17 miles east of Wagon Mound on pavement then county road. Nice headquarters and good access to above rim. Wildlife include antelope, mule deer and some elk. $2,710,000
RATON MILLION DOLLAR VIEW, Colfax County, NM. 97.68 +/- deeded acres, 2 parcels, excellent home, big shop, wildlife, a true million dollar view at end of private road. $489,000. House & 1 parcel $375,000
SOLD
MIAMI 80 ACRES, Colfax County, NM. 80 +/- deeded acres, 80 water shares, expansive views, house, shop, roping arena, barns and outbuildings. Reduced $485,000
COLD BEER VIEW, Colfax County, NM 83.22 +/- deeded acre, 3,174 sq ft, 5 bedroom, 3 ½ bathrm, 2 car garage home situated on top of the hill with amazing 360 degree views. MIAMI HORSE HEAVEN, Colfax County, NM. Very Reduced $398,000 $349,000 private approx. 4,800 sq ft double walled adobe MIAMI 20 ACRES, Colfax County, NM. 20 +/- deed4 bedroom, 3 bathroom home with many custom ed acres, 20 water shares, quality 2,715 sq ft adobe features, 77.50 +/- deeded acres with water rights home, barn, grounds and trees. Private setting. This is and large 7 stall barn, insulated metal shop with own a must see. Reduced to $265,000 septic. Would suit indoor growing operation, large hay FRENCH TRACT 80, Irrigated farm with gated pipe, barn/equipment shed. $1,375,000. house, stone shop, many out buildings privacy. MAXWELL FARM IMPROVED, Colfax County, Reduced to $292,000 $282,000 NM. 280 +/- deeded acres, 160 Class A irrigation shares, 2 center pivots, nice sale barn, 100 hd feed- MAXWELL SMALL HOLDING, home with horse lot. Depredation Elk Tags available. Owner financing improvements, fenced, water rights and 19+/available to qualified buyer. Significantly reduced to deeded acres. Handy to I25 on quiet country road. $232,000. $550,000
CONTRACT P E N D IN G
TEXAS & OKLA. FARMS & RANCHES • 80 acre wood home with barns, meadows and woods. Fronts State Rd. $650,000 • 14 acre Van Zandt County TX, Canton. 2 homes, 2 shops. Fronts State Rd. Excellent buy at $400,000 • 160 acre Ranger Eastland Co, $560,000 • 270 acre Mitchell County, Texas ranch. Investors dream; excellent cash flow. Rock formation being crushed and sold; wind turbans, some minerals. Irrigation water developed, crop & cattle, modest improvements. Just off I-20. Price reduced to $1.6 million.
505-507-2915 cell 505-838-0095 fax
116 Plaza PO Box 1903 Socorro, NM 87801 www.socorroplazarealty.com dbrown@socorroplazarealty.com
BAKER CITY, OREGON Andrew Bryan, Owner/Broker Office 541-523-5871 Cell 208-484-5835
andrew@bakercityrealty.com www.bakercityrealty.com
Bottari Realty
Bar M Real Estate
Paul Bottari, Broker
775/752-3040 Nevada Farms & raNch PrOPerTY
SCOTT MCNALLY www.ranchesnm.com 575/622-5867 575/420-1237
www.bottarirealty.com
Ranch Sales & Appraisals
AG LOANS AGLAND LAND LOANS Selling residential, farm, ranch, commercial and relocating properties.
AsLow LowAsAs 3% As 4.5% OPWKCAP 2.9% OPWKCAP 2.9%
INTEREST RATESAS AS LOW 3% INTEREST RATES LOW ASAS 4.5% Payments Scheduledon on2525 Years Payments Scheduled Years
COLETTA RAY
Pioneer Realty 1304 Pile Street, Clovis, NM 88101
575-799-9600 Direct 575.935.9680 Office 575.935.9680 Fax coletta@plateautel.net www.clovisrealestatesales.com
Joe Stubblefield & Associates 13830 Western St., Amarillo, TX 806/622-3482 • cell 806/674-2062 joes3@suddenlink.net Michael Perez Associates Nara Visa, NM • 575/403-7970
Joe Priest Real Estate
1-800/671-4548
joepriestre.net • joepriestre@earthlink.com
521 West Second St. • Portales, NM 88130
575-226-0671 or 575-226-0672 fax
Buena Vista Realty
Qualifying Broker: A.H. (Jack) Merrick 575-760-7521 www.buenavista-nm.com
DOUBLE L RANCH – Central NM, 10 miles west of Carrizozo, NM. 12,000 total acres; 175 AUYL, BLM Section 3 grazing permit; Water provided by 3 wells and buried pipeline. Improvements include house and pens. Price Reduced: $1,150,000 X T RANCH – Southeastern NM cattle ranch 40 miles northwest of Roswell, NM on the Chaves/Lincoln County line. Good grass ranch with gently rolling grass covered hills. 8,000 total acres, 200 AUYL grazing capacity. Partitioned into four pastures watered by 2 wells with pipelines. Call for brochure. Price: $1,750,000 SOUTH BROWN LAKE RANCH – Nicely improved cattle ranch located northwest of Roswell, NM. 5,735 total acres to include 960 acres deeded. 164 A.U. yearlong grazing capacity. Modern residence, bunkhouse, shop and feed barn. Three wells and buried pipeline. Excellent grass country. Price: $1,300,000 L-X RANCH – Southeastern NM just ten minutes from Roswell, NM with paved gated and locked access. 3,761 total acres divided into several pastures and traps. Nice improvements to include a site built adobe residence. One well with extensive pipeline system. Well suited for a registered cattle operation. Price: $900,000 $825,000
Missouri Land Sales
See all my listings at: paulmcgilliard.murney.com
Paul McGilliard • 564 ACRE GASCONADE RIVER FARM. 360 Acres of lush Cell: 417/839-5096 grass/hay/tillable bottom ground make up this highly productive 1-800/743-0336 livestock/hunting property.Well maintained older 4 Bed, 3 Ba Murney Assoc., Realtors home. Only 45 miles east of Springfield, Mo. MLS#60115449 Springfield, MO 65804 • 11.2 ACRES GREAT RETREAT IN THE WOODS, or permanent residence if you love seclusion! Winter view of the North Fork River. Would be a great corporate retreat, or a large family, could sleep 15+. Property sells fully furnished. MLS#60109625 • 80 ACRES - 60 Acres hayable, live water only 50 miles east of Springfield, 1/4 mile off of Hwy 60. 3 Bed, 1 1/2 Ba, 1432 sq. ft. home, nestled under the trees. Full basement (partially finished), John Deer Room. MLS#60059808.
Scott Land co. Ranch & Farm Real Estate
1301 Front Street, Dimmitt, TX 79027 Ben G. Scott - Broker Krystal M. Nelson - NM Qualifying Broker 800-933-9698 • 5:00am/10:00pm www.scottlandcompany.com
WE NEED LISTINGS ON ALL TYPES OF AG PROPERTIES LARGE OR SMALL! EXCELLENT LOCATION for a convenience store/truck stop or other commercial development. 5.403 ac. +/located at the intersection of US Hwy. 385 & State Hwy. 194 on the south edge of Dimmitt in Castro County, Texas. Adjoining 7.594 ac. +/- is/may be available. SANTA ROSA, NM – 78 ac. +/- heavily improved for horses, cattle & other livestock w/virtually new barns, pens, cross fences etc., on city water, w/internet access to the front gate. STRONG WATER AREA – first three new wells have
been drilled & are ready to be developed, drilling rig will remain on property until all new wells are drilled, 1,280 ac. +/-, Texas Co., OK, three ¼ mile sprinklers in place, remaining five quarters to be developed w/new wells & new sprinklers on all five quarters, test holes drilled, located in close proximity to a large commercial feedyard. Please call for further details! UTE LAKE SUBDIVISION – beautiful, new custom-built home, over 5,000 sq. ft. on 3.230 ac. +/-, 4 bdrm., 3 ½ bath, 3 fireplaces, immaculate w/view from every room.
Page 10
Livestock Market Digest
CLASSIFIEDS KADDATZ
Auctioneering and Farm Equipment Sales New and used tractors, equipment, and parts. Salvage yard, combines, tractors, hay equipment and all types of equipment parts. ORDER PARTS ONLINE.
www.kaddatzequipment.com • 254/582-3000
HOME SPUN by Jim Olson Giving Thanks
I g•u•i•d•e angus
Bradley 3 Ranch Ltd. 70+ Charolais Bulls 200+ Angus Bulls
— BULL SALE — FEBRUARY 9, 2019
At The Ranch NE Of Estelline, Texas
www.bradley3ranch.com M. L.: 940/585-6471 James: 940/585-6171.
Ranch-Raised Bulls For Ranchers Since 1955
BEEFMASTER
HEREFORD
Registered Polled Herefords Bulls & Heifers
FOR SALE AT THE FARM
Cañones Route P.O. Abiquiu, N.M. 87510 MANUEL SALAZAR P.O. Box 867 Española, N.M. 87532
575/638-5434 RED ANGUS
A SOURCE FOR PROVEN SUPERIOR RED ANGUS GENETICS 14298 N. Atkins Rd., Lodi, CA 95240
209/727-3335
BRANGUS
R.L. Robbs 520/384-3654 4995 Arzberger Rd. Willcox, Arizona 85643 Willcox, AZ
CORRIENTE
t started close to 400 years ago in New England. The modern Thanksgiving holiday tradition traces its origins to a 1621 harvest celebration at Plymouth. There is also evidence of an earlier celebration by Spanish explorers in Florida during 1565. As far back in recorded history as you go, there have been celebrations of thanks at harvest time. The Plymouth feast and Thanksgiving are what we celebrate in America. They were prompted not only by a good harvest, but also in appreciation of the Native Americans who helped the Pilgrims by providing seeds and also for showing the settlers the tricks of hunting in the area. Some say if the Natives could have foreseen the future onslaught of European settlers coming, they may not have been so hospitable! But seriously, it would not have mattered, this continent was destined to be “discovered” by the rest of the world no matter what. Sooner or later, somebody would have “found it,” that’s for sure. Progress and change are always coming. I believe there is a silver lining to every situation. Thinking along those lines, looking at it from a positive point of view, folks should be glad the Pilgrims who came here first (after the Natives that is) were the Christian based Europeans they were. Imagine if Red China or another country like that had gotten here ahead of the Spanish. There would be no “Native American” culture alive and thriving here…or any other type of free “American” culture for that matter. “Some people grumble that roses have thorns; I am grateful that thorns have roses.” – Alphonse Karr There are always positives in every situation, something to be thankful for, you just have to look for it. I am thankful that America is here today. Being thankful is so much more than a once-a-year holiday tradition. Daily thanks are more important than some may realize. It has the power to set the tone of an entire day, project, week, year, or lifetime. It is hard to be grouchy, negative or in a bad mood when you are focusing on being thankful! I start every day by giving thanks for my many blessings in life, even if at times they seem hard to count. No matter what kind of mood I wake up in, it doesn’t take long to change my outlook once I’ve thought about the positives in life. “What ever a man sows, that he will also reap.” – Gal. 6:7 Remember what we plant
November 15, 2018 within ourselves in the way of thoughts, feelings and attitudes are the seeds of our outer life experiences. All things have their beginnings within us—in thought. For some that is hard to believe, others never really think about it, but upon further analysis, it can be no other way. “The ancestor of every great action is a thought.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson If you approach life in a surly or negative mood that is exactly what life will give you back. Snapping at the person behind the counter or on the other end of the phone does not get you better customer service. As a matter of fact, it gets you worse service! If you act like this, you will not get favors, special treatment or opportunities that a positive person in a good mood might get. Give attitude—get attitude. When you get right down to it—it is your thoughts, which control your attitude. How you think about things determines whether you are in a good or bad mood. Besides not getting customer service and productive interactions with your fellow man, thoughts are also the basis of most everything material as well. Buildings, machinery, techno-devices, money and such do not just spring into reality on their own, by spontaneous combustion. They originate as the product of someone’s thoughts and dreams first. Folks who invent and plan the products and successful ventures never do so out of negativity or with a “that won’t work” type of attitude. “Whether you think that you can, or that you can’t, either way you are right.” – Henry Ford Many folks say that things on the invisible plane such as “luck,” “fate,” and “chance,” whether good or bad, are created through your own thoughts. Think productive, happy, positive thoughts and things seem to go your way. Be negative, grouchy and surly and things never seem to work out for you. The negative type of folk generally point a finger at the positive type and say things like, “He was just born lucky, everything he touches turns to gold while everything I touch turns to bull manure.” The so-called “Midas touch.” They honestly believe that— then wonder why life turns out bad for them. There is a direct correlation between what you think and feel and how things turn out for you. Think about it: Everything starts with a thought (even this great big universe started out as a Divine thought somewhere). How you think then sets the tone for how you feel. Negative, grouchy thoughts turn into bad moods just as happy, positive thoughts turn into good moods. How you feel, determines the mode of action you take in life. If you feel good, you interact with folks likewise. You come up with positive solutions to obstacles in business or work; the opposite is also true if you are surly or negative. Your actions become chain reactions, which help set up the results you get from life. Nobody likes to be around a grouch. They will find ways to excuse them-
selves from a situation with one as soon as possible. People do not like to see you coming if they know the exchange may be an unpleasant one. Also, when an opportunity comes along, whom do you think gets first chance at it? Not the guy who is negative, that’s for sure. “Work harder,” “Try more,” “Dig deeper,” “Go the extra mile,” are all sayings which have been around forever. What folks don’t always realize, however, is the attitude they approach life with makes a big difference in how well those work ethics pan out for them. I guarantee the guy with a happy and positive attitude, and the same work ethic, will beat out the grumpy one sooner or later. “When I started counting my blessings, my whole life turned around.” – Willie Nelson So what does all of this have to do with giving thanks you may ask? Simple. By being thankful for what you have, by focusing on your blessings in life instead of the shortcomings, it naturally puts you in a better mood. It is hard to remain in a bad mood when you focus on being grateful. Thinking about what you don’t have in life instead of being thankful for what you do have is counter-productive anyway. “A man is just about as happy as he makes his mind up to be.” – Abraham Lincoln That is a profound statement. How do you make your mind up to be happy, one may ask? Start with being thankful and you are half way there. “And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord, giving thanks to God the Father.” – Col. 3:17 Great people of achievement, and the Bible, tell us over and over again to be thankful. Why do they do this? Because they know by being thankful, you put your thoughts into a more positive mode. Doing this changes your attitude. As you change your attitude, you change how you approach life. When you approach life feeling good and positive— your actions (efforts) change and then you get better results out of life. “I thank God for my handicaps. For through them, I have found myself, my work and my God.” – Helen Keller Try not to focus on things outside of your control, it does no good anyhow. Start with being the best you can be, work on self first, then your whole world changes. It is simple. The great people of the past and the good Lord have always taught us this. Good starts from within. Of course, this eventually manifests into better realities without. The easiest way to begin is by being thankful for what you now have. I recommend you do it daily at a minimum. It will have a profound and positive effect on your life. This Thanksgiving, there is nothing wrong with sitting around, stuffing yourself on a nice home-cooked meal. But please remember that giving thanks (not just once-a-year or even once-aweek - but daily) is a very important step in creating a better reality you will enjoy tomorrow and every tomorrow thereafter. Happy Thanksgiving y’all!
November 15, 2018
The BLM and BuddFalen, I come clean with Jim Watt, and a DuBois “F”
Budd-Falen
M
any of us have been hoping for almost two years now that Wyoming attorney Karen Budd-Falen would be appointed Director of the Bureau of Land Management. She had served on Trump’s transition committee for the Department of Interior and seemed like a natural for the position, but that was not to be. Instead, she has accepted an appointment as Deputy Solicitor for Wildlife and Parks. Budd-Falen will provide legal counsel on issues regarding the programs and activities of the National Park Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the biological research functions of the Geological Survey. She will also provide counsel on matters involving “the acquisition and administration of the National Parks and wildlife refuges, the designation of wild and scenic rivers and wilderness areas, historic preservation, law enforcement, First Amendment activities, environmental protection,
Livestock Market Digest
grants-in-aid, and endangered species protection.” As you can see, that is not an insignificant position in the Socilitor’s office. In a recent interview BuddFalen disclosed it was the strict interpretation of conflicts of interest by the ethics office that eventually led to her not being appointed as Director of BLM. First she was asked to leave her position at the law firm she founded, and to this she agreed. She also agreed to withdraw from her current cases. Then she agreed to recuse herself from any cases involving the Department of the Interior. But that was not all. They then insisted a change in the name of the law firm, which was okeh. Next, they said her husband Frank Falen, could not accept any cases involving the department, and finally determined he shouldn’t practice law at all. To all this they agreed. Then came the final demand: she would have to sell her interest in the ranch which had been in her family for five generations and Frank Falen would have to divest himself of any interest in his family’s ranch in Nevada. That’s where Budd-Falen drew the line and
said no. Altogether, a sad tale, but she should have seen the last one coming. The BLM regulations on ethical standards say, “…employees and their spouses and their minor children are prohibited from acquiring or retaining any claim, permit, lease, small tract entries, or other rights that are granted by the Department in Federal lands.” I remember from my time at Interior that Bob Burford ran into the same issue. He had to sell his interest in his ranches to a partnership controlled by his ex-wife and his three sons. This still did not satisfy the ethics office because Burford owned 25 percent of the partnership, and the ethics officials said he still had a “retention of interest”. Finally, Secretary Jim Watt granted Burford a waiver after Burford assured the ethics office that he would “recuse (excuse) himself from making any decisions which directly affect” the grazing permits. It sure seems that Interior could have made some type of similar accommodation for BuddFalen. All of this reminds me of when I had to “come clean” with Secretary Watt. Everyone had to go through an FBI background check. Given all the places I had lived in college and the many places I had worked construction jobs (from California to New Jersey), I came up with 47 different addresses where I had lived, so I’m sure they had fun running down all
Page 11
background report before signing my papers. He said no, so I told him about all the arrests. Watt only had one question, “Did any of these events happen in the last ten years?” I said no and he said then he wasn’t going to worry about it but thanked me for the alert. The announcement of my appointment went out and the response was…nothing. Whew! I guess if you are a po’boy, with no stocks or bonds, you can drink and fight and the media doesn’t care. My only conflicts had been with other people.
the goods on me. Here was the problem: I had been thrown in jail four times. Once for drinking while a minor, and three times for either public affray or assault and battery, i.e., fighting. Many of Reagan’s appointees to Interior and other agencies had been controversial because they had to sell stocks, bonds, or otherwise divest themselves of interests in businesses or firms because of conflicts of interest. The media was going over all these appointments for either anti-Reagan or anti-Watt stories. Normally, a lowly deputy assistant secretary appointment would go unnoticed, but given this atmosphere I was sure that most probably would not be the case. I had been working as a Special Assistant until my final appointment went through, and I just hadn’t worked up the nerve to tell Watt what was probably in my FBI report. One day I was waiting to get on the elevator, and the head of Congressional Affairs stepped out and said, “Congratulations Frank, I just saw Watt sign your papers.” Oh, no. I immediately went back to my office to schedule a visit with the Secretary. He had left for the day, so I went to Under Secretary Don Hodel’s office, and told him I really needed to talk to the Secretary about my background report. Hodel said he would have Watt call me when he got home. The call finally came and I asked Watt if he had read the
Hamburger “F”s In a recent report Consumers Union has given an “F” to 22 out of the 25 burger joints studied for not serving beef that was certified as being raised antibiotic free. Among those given a failing grade were some familiar names, like McDonalds, Burger King, Sonic Drive-ins and Jack in a Box. Some may consider this a failing grade or a terrible report on their products. That is not the case if you interpret the “F” appropriately. In this case, the “F” stands for flavorful, fantastic, filling, fabulous, finest, firstclass, fragrant and first-rate. So be sure and visit those establishments given a DuBois “F”. Until next time, be a nuisance to the devil and don’t forget to check that cinch. Frank DuBois was the NM Secretary of Agriculture from 1988 to 2003, is the author of a blog: The Westerner (www.thewesterner. blogspot.com) and is the founder of The DuBois Rodeo Scholarship and The DuBois Western Heritage Foundation
VITAMINS of at least one-third corn silage and the rest grain. “If we’re just feeding all grain, we’re going to be short on the requirements.” Vitamins are often part of a free-choice mineral supplement or premix where reading tags gives an accurate measure of the initial levels. Cattle need 40,000 IU of vitamin A each day and most mineral on the shelves today provides more than that. “Again, more is not always better,” Heldt said, but he allowed the safety margins help compensate for storage losses over time. Environmental factors like water and heat and light, from manufacturing to storage, pose a threat to vitamin efficacy. “For example, potency loss can double for every 25-degree increase in temperature,” Heldt said. Mineral source plays a role in the amount of vitamins delivered from the mix, too. Vitamins that are organically sourced offer more stability, compared to those from oxide or sulfate trace minerals, he said. But storage time may be most critical. “There could be some of those products that we’ve got in our warehouses that don’t get fed for three or four months,” he said. “Is that realistic?”
Producers should be aware of how long a product was warehoused before they buy and how long it may sit on their farm or ranch before it’s fed,
Heldt reiterated. But first, evaluate quality and vitamin quantity of their forage. “I want you to go home and as you’re driving back, think
ELM
about what you’re doing and why you’re doing it,” he said in closing. “Make sure you’re doing the right thing.”
FARMINGTON
mineral requirements after the ingredient price spiked about 10 years ago. “Lo and behold, that 12% phosphorous mineral I’m feeding my cows got really expensive and I decided I better do something different,” Heldt said. “Now what’s the common phosphorous level in cow mineral supplements—4% to 6% maybe, and we seem to have gotten by just fine.” The extra amount was seen as a safety factor, but a price spike drove home the point, “more is not always better.” That’s true with vitamins as well, partly because the fat-soluble ones have a three- to sixmonth storage buffer in the liver, and the others, C and the B complex, cannot be stored in the body at all, Heldt explained. Vitamin A is the most critical for cow-calf operations, with its connections to reproduction and immunity. Particularly since the price spike, producers want to know what vitamins their feedstuffs are actually delivering and how to balance rations without unnecessary added cost, he said. The National Research Council publishes recommendations but diets of “good green growing feeds” generally provide adequate vitamin A and E, Heldt noted, as does a ration
continued from page one
TO SACRAMENTO
STOCKTON
HWY 4
J17 M ARI
POSA
SALE SITE
RD
VALLEY HOME
HWY 99 OAKDALE
HWY 120 ESCALON
SALE MANTECA HEADQUARTERS
MODESTO
#N
TO FRESNO
Facility located at: 25525 East Lone Tree Road, Escalon, CA 95320
ESCALON LIVESTOCK MARKET, INC.
LIVESTOCK SALES 3 days per week on
Monday, Wednesday, & Friday MONDAY: Beef Cattle WEDNESDAY: Dairy Cattle NTS IGNME CONS OME! WELC r more Call fo ation inform ning sig on con stock. your
MIGUEL A. MACHADO President Office: 209/838-7011 Mobile: 209/595-2014
FRIDAY: Small Animals Poultry – Butcher Cows JOE VIEIRA Representative Mobile: 209/531-4156 THOMAS BERT 209/605-3866
CJ BRANTLEY Field Representative 209/596-0139
www.escalonlivestockmarket.com • escalonlivestockmarket@yahoo.com
Page 12
Livestock Market Digest
November 15, 2018
Don’t Believe the Hype, Organic Food Doesn’t Prevent Cancer BY GIDEON MEYEROWITZ-KATZ / THEGUARDIAN.COM
Alarmist fearmongering over the scary chemicals in your food is all the rage, the reality is far more humdrum
O
ne of the most enduring health fads of the last decades has been the organic movement. Maybe it’s because we are all terrified of chemicals, or perhaps the marketing has just done its job; either way, virtually every wellness pitch these days comes with the same advice: “Eat organic. It’s better for your health.” In our modern world, the idea rings so true. Pesticide-free, with no genetic modifications, organic food must be better for our health. And a new story has popped up across the world that seems to
support this idea. Media everywhere is reporting that eating organic is not just good for the planet, it can prevent cancer as well. But while alarmist fearmongering over the scary chemicals in your food is all the rage, the reality is far more humdrum. It turns out that organics probably don’t prevent cancer after all. The current noise in the media is over a large epidemiological study that looked at French adults and their eating habits. The researchers asked a group of 70,000 people what they ate, and then followed them up a number of years later. They then grouped people together according to how much organic food they ate, and compared the risk of getting cancer across groups. They found that people who scored highest on their organic food eating scale, after controlling
for potential confounding variables, were also less likely to get cancer. There were also protective effects on some specific cancers — postmenopausal breast and lymphoma — although this was not true for prostate, colorectal, skin, or premenopausal breast cancer. But overall — organics stopped people getting cancer! Good news for organic eaters, surely? Sadly, that’s not the end of the story. At the outset, I should say that this was one of the best epidemiological trials I’ve seen in a while. The analysis was brilliant, the subject very interesting, and while I don’t think it means very much at all, it’s still a well done piece of science. There were lots of major limitations of this study. For anyone who actually read the paper, they
were mostly acknowledged by the authors. 1. The measure of organic food intake wasn’t great, as it was based on a very simplistic questionnaire. This makes it very hard to know if this study accurately represents the intakes of organic foods, particularly as it directly contradicts other research. 2. Residual confounding is a huge issue in studies like this – the authors controlled for the variables they know about, but there’s a good chance that there are additional things that may have influenced the results. 3. People who ate organic foods were much healthier than those who didn’t. The group with the highest organic food intake scored better on every other measure of health (smoking, weight, heart disease etc) than those who ate the least, making residual con-
founding much more likely. 4. The study is hard to generalize, as the participants were mostly affluent French women, who aren’t really representative of the world in general. 5. The absolute risk difference was very small. While those who ate the most organics were 25 percent less likely to get cancer, this actually equated to an absolute risk reduction of about 0.5 percent (cancer is relatively rare,). 6. The results did not hold true for men, younger adults, less educated people, people who never smoked or smoke currently, or (and this one is important), those with a high overall dietary quality. Which brings us to the really interesting question. What does this study mean (to you)? It’s always hard to tell what scientific studies actually mean to you, because they aren’t really written with the average person in mind. That being said, there’s a good general rule when it comes to large epidemiological studies that I always advocate: Don’t worry about epidemiology, it means very little to your life. This study is a good example. Even if we ignore the many limitations, switching most of your diet to organic, at huge cost, for the rest of your life, to potentially reduce your risk of cancer by less than one percent is a bit of a big ask. You would get much more out of exercising for 30 minutes more a week, or cutting back on the booze, or quitting smoking, than by doubling the cost of your weekly shop. But taking the limitations into account, it’s hard to take anything out from this study at all. If you are male, well-educated, or don’t smoke, there’s no reason to eat organic based on this study at all. In fact, the main group that eating organics seemed to help was postmenopausal French women, and while that is still an interesting finding it limits the applicability of this study to many people’s lives. There are also previous studies in this area that have found entirely different results. One study of more than 600,000 people found that eating organic foods conferred no reduction in risk whatsoever, making this new study seem a bit less rosy. There’s also not much evidence behind the theory that organics are healthier, particularly given that some of the concerns about conventional farming — GMOs are a great example — have been conclusively proven to be safe. One final thing that is really important: if you looked just at those who had a high score for their dietary quality, organic food did nothing. No difference. It appears that, if you eat a balanced diet with lots of fresh fruit and veg, it doesn’t matter whether you opt for organics or conventionally-farmed foods. Don’t believe the hype. Organic food doesn’t prevent cancer. Editor’s Note: Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz is an epidemiologist working in chronic disease in Sydney’s west, with a particular focus on the social determinants that control our health.