/ 



patkiTs bii.viiitr from iiiflividual farmers 

 and from local livestock co-opcrativea op- 

 erated by highly trained and informed 

 , manttgt'rs. And ilirect buying of cattle 

 from individual farmers," he continued, 

 "offers far more dangers than direct buy- 

 ing of hogs." Mr. Smith warned farmers 

 to be on their guard against selling cat- 

 tle to packer buyers and speculators and 

 quoted a statement by one country buyer 

 to the efifect that h« maile enough profit 

 -to buy. a new/Ford car on cvery^farload 

 of catUe purcha-sed during the nmrkct 

 rise. \ • X.,.,^ 



"The I. .\. A. in l'.':!.j has a mandate 

 from 'its p«Veriiing body adopted at thi> 

 last annual meeting to, support concen- 

 tration of livestock in present co-opera- 

 tiv^selling agencies," he continued. "\Vc 

 are nnt gying to take skJcs on ^J*«^(iues- 

 tioo of^erminal vs. direol selling. We 

 believe this is a s<rund program to follow 

 until we know niorc about the influence 

 on prices of thesevdifferent types of rhar- 

 ketTftgr— VV> krfow that the effect of or- 

 ganizing livestock at co-operative con- 

 centration points is to increase the vol- 

 ume^of Itvesfock marketed co-operative- 

 ly in the termfn.ils." 



Mr. Smith confined the Ij^Mer part of 

 his address to a distu.^sion of* production 

 control, pending amendi>ients 4« the 

 ricultural Adjust meitjt' Act, jut&'wiem- 

 ploynient relief. 



Begins 

 fglil to pass these ameiidnients 

 J.>egins ne.xt Tuesday," he sai<l. "It's not 

 goiiig~to-be_iiasy becau.se there is a gen- 

 eral lack of understanding of the merits 

 "■f the proposed program. When the time 



. ''«?erhi'es we want your support. The lead- 

 ing amendment we deMfe is to take out 

 "f the lan^he necesti*tj:^orJjicjiaxBie'»t 

 Pnefits to producers of a commodity 

 when a processing tax is levHeii on such 

 TT^commodity. Kv^ipynne knows that it 



' is exceedingly difficuit, if not impossible, 

 to make accurate and fair allotments to 

 individual farmers for hiVRs. cattle, sheep 

 and dairy produces. It is much more 

 .simple to control' feed grains and then 

 maintain a nof'mal surplus to tide us over 

 in case" of drouth against which ware- 

 house certificates may be issued and 



"^lUidc the basis for storage loans. 



"This ^niendnieirt^ivill make possible 

 only a nominal tax on each commodity, 

 the revenue from vthich can be used to 

 export surpluses, to develop non-food 

 uses for farm crops, or to control 

 acreagfe. 



"I believe that livestock growers every- 



■ where, as well as dairymen, will sup- 

 port this kind of a program when they 

 thoroughly understand it. .^t a recent 

 meeting of Illinois dairy leaders .senti- 

 ment was unanimous for the proposed 

 amendment. It is generally conceded that 

 it would be much more fair to spread 

 the processiiig lax over all the livestock 



*^ 



Upheld 



62 Per Cent Grain Shown 

 By Chicago Produci 



being benefited t>y the corn acreage con- 

 trol program rather than to get n>^irly 

 all tjie money from the hoff-4M<Hiucer. 

 Hogs are now paying US per cent of the 

 cost of the feed grain control program." 

 In his talk on the subject "Individual 

 vs. Organized Livestock Marketing," C. 

 (i. Randall in charge of the livestock and 

 wool section of the Farm Credit Ailmin- 

 istratioq, declared that in recent years 

 packers have gone to the country and du- 

 plicated terminal market facilities now 

 under government supervision for weigh- 

 ing and grading livestock aiul are now 

 doing their own weighing and grading. 

 In the Illinois Livestock Marketing Asso- 

 ciation, he said, you are attempting to 

 correlate direct ; marketing an<l terminal 

 marketing. Although packers have their 

 organization, the Institute, they some- 

 times assume that farmers don't need an 

 organization to represent them in the 

 sale of their livestock. I'ackerV have hun- 

 dreds of buyers in the country purchas- 

 ing livestock today where formerly they 

 had only a few buyers, comparatively 

 speaking, on the terminal markets. These 

 buyers have the advantage over the indi- 

 vrdual farmer because thoy possess more- 

 information. 



Buyer Ha.s Advantage 



P'or example, the packer buyer luis in- 

 formation on cut-out values, storage,sup- 

 plies, the dressed trade market. liveslo:k 

 receipts, etc. Individual farmers have no 

 ready means of getting such informa- 

 tion." 



.Mr. Randall charged that there has 

 *l>een altogether too much attention paid 

 to thf cost of getting the livestock to the 

 packer which reprisents ordy l.'i per cent 

 of the total costs involved. Fiirniers 

 should be getting more information and 

 be concerned about ways and means of 

 reducing the other 8.5 per cent of over- 

 head expenses involved in processing the 

 livestock, and shipping, wholesaling and 

 (Continued on page 7) 



("orpwUion Of Slali'mej»t^As I'ub- 

 ' tishca In 19.M I. A^. Report 



The Livi'stoek 'Market inir Sectiou_of 

 the 1. A. .V-^'iiK'iil Report for I'.':! I 

 erroneou.*0' reporte<l the vohnne bf busi- 

 ness irandled by the Chicago I'l-'oducers 

 <lurin>r their first year of operation as 

 -I7,!tl<> cars, whereas the correct figui'c 

 is ILT'.U cars. The IT.i'lC) car.% a.s'shown 

 in the report, was the business done by 

 the Chicago I'rixhicers during l!'2l -a 

 year of .-dinormally large, receipts of live 

 stockdn the Chicago market and one in, 

 which very few <lirects were receivc<l. 



The Chicago Producers handled liMIT 

 cars in 1!'."!4, a gain of 7;.'!lJ(> cars, oi- an 

 increase of >V2'"r oyer the- first ycilr's 

 business. Not mily have the Chicago 

 Producers gained in V(dume of live stock 

 sold cooperatively on the Chicago mar- 

 ket but also in the percentage of total 

 receipts. .Vs contrasted to -l.()4'"r of the 

 market receijits handled the first, year, 

 the 1 '.••■>! percentjTge was more than three 

 times as great .-it \2.'X','~,'. The .\ssocia- 

 tion stood in first place among all the 

 firms on the market. hiUidlinu- more than 

 double the nexr largest firm. 



Cain In .MI Classes 



I)uring the year lO.'U the < hii ag»> I'm- 

 ilucer.i sold 8.1'"; of the cattle, compared 

 with 7.1 ';r sold duriim Iia'!; I4.2'6': 

 the calves as- against 12.0."!% in 1 

 17.44% of the hogs n> <'onipared' wit b 

 M.fi'"^ in l!>3:i: and IK..-)-; of ^Ji^ sheep 

 as against 15.18'"'r in lO.'!". 



The gain in the volume of trucked-in 

 business handled by the Chicago Pro- 

 ducers has been particularly s1iikir\g. In 

 i:>.'!4 the Association handled L'l.Kl^; of 

 the total t'rucked-in business- a gain of 

 27.50':r— handling I4.7!>'~; Of the tQtal 

 number of cattle trucked Jo the Chicago 

 market; 24.16'~^ of the calves; 23.77% 

 of the hogs; and 21.09% of the sheep and 

 lambs. 



'On ApiHl 2n, lit.34 the Chicago Pro- 

 ducers started operating under a new 

 and lower schedule of commission rates 

 ordered effective by the .Secretary of 

 .Vgriculture. representing an average re- 

 /luction of 20 to 2.5% less than the Vrc- 

 vailing rates on. the Chicago market. 

 .Since inaugurated, the savings to patrons 

 of the Chicago Producers have amountc<l 

 in the aggregate to more than $.50,000. 



The increase in the amount of liv<- 

 stock handled by the Chicago J'roducers 

 has enable<l it to greatly -increase and 

 extetxl the services rendered it.'^ patrons. 

 Its present volume, trained and experi- 

 enced personnel, and splendid financial 

 position, makes this association one of 

 the outstanding successes in .the field of 

 cooperative livestock marketing. 



I. A. A. I{i:( OKI) 



