354 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE OfE. Doc. 



a good price for that feed, economical feeding, he could feed 75 

 cents corn, |3.50 silage, |15.00 hay and 85 cents cotton seed meal, 

 and produce those additional pounds for less money than he would 

 have spent for it; in other words, it would have been more economi- 

 cal for that farmer to have kept that animal on the farm, and be- 

 sides increased our meat supply. 



The lesson we can draw from this is that there are too many thin 

 caittle coming on the market at the present time, and, as a matter 

 of fact, at most times of the year. Animals should stay in the feed 

 lot and be finished out more. The difference in the value of the 

 carcass per hundred weight is 89 cents. Look at it from the packer's 

 point of view, buying these two animals at $5.57 and |6.50 ; this car- 

 cass over here costs the packer only 38 cents a hundred more than 

 does that carcass over there. From an economical point of view, 

 from the point of view of the consumer and packer, this is by far 

 the cheapest carcass on the weight basis, yet everyone concerned was 

 benefited by putting out a carcass of that kind. The difference in 

 live weight is 93 cents between the two — nearly |1.00 a hundred. 

 I wanted you to have those figures so we could know what we are 

 doing. I am going to take these two front quarters first and I want 

 to call your attention to one or two things; in selecting animals on 

 foot for meat animals, we try to get them well developed over the 

 rib and over the loin and to have well sprung ribs, to have that 

 flesh well carried down over the ribs. There is a reason not only 

 from the point of view of the farmer, but the packer, and he is the 

 man who should not be lost sight of. We sometimes find that animals 

 that are not so well flesh, over the ribs and over the loin, will prob- 

 ably make just as many pounds of gain in the feed lot as will an 

 animal well formed or well filled out in these respects. What does 

 that mean? That means that that animal is putting the fat on its 

 side and on the part of the carcass where we don't get the value of 

 the cuts, and the result is that from the packer's point of view, it 

 is not economical and he pays less for that sort of an animal. What 

 he wants is to get a large amount of rib, a large amount of loin, or 

 he wants to get that body weight or dressed weight in the ribs and 

 loin so far as possible. The reason is this, that out of tlie ribs and 

 out of the loin we get the high priced cuts or the most desirable 

 cuts from the commercial point of view. That chart over there illus- 

 trates that point. We find that on the market that the weight of 

 the two loins from the beef represents about 17 per cent, of the total 

 weight of that carcass. They represent, however, 33.66 per cent, of 

 the value of that carcass. The round represents 23 per cent, of the 

 weight and 19.67 per cent, of the value. The chucks, which come, as 

 you notice, out of the fore quarters toward the front of the carcass, 

 a cheaper cut, more bone, more tissue, represent 26 per cent, of the 

 weight and 18.31 per cent, of the value. The plates and other cheap 

 and inferior cuts in the lower part of the carcass represent 13 per 

 cent, of the weight and 9.01 per cent, of the value. The flank, an- 

 other cheap cut from the lower part of the carcass, represents 4 per 

 cent, of the weight and .89 per cent, of the value. The ribs, another 

 high priced cut, represents 9 per cent, of the weight and 15.47 per 

 cent, of the value. The shank represents 4 per cent, of the weight and 

 1.49 per cent, of the value. The suet represents 4 per cent', of the 

 weight and 19.01 per cent, of the value; so that the packer has an 



