MONTANA FARM REVIEW 



Beef Cattle. 



Continued disparity between market prices for beef and production costs and 

 difficulties in financing beef-cattle production have resulted in another poor year 

 for the industry. Stockmen specializing in beef cattle have faced this situation during 

 the entire post-war period, during which they have seen the beef-cattle dollar fluctu- 

 ate about a low point in purchasing power, such as would appear ultimately to 

 mean certain elimination for many producers. On the other hand neither stockyard 

 receipts, nor assessment data indicate any appreciable decrease in total numbers of 

 cattle, and there is evidence of an increase In numbers of what may be tenned 

 farm cattle, as a consequence of the loss of market for feed crops in recent years, 

 and the necessity on part of the grain farmer of increasing his livestock to utilize this 

 surplus on the farm. This competition from the farmer has added to the diffi- 

 culties of the range cattleman. 



Figure XTV. 



PiSTRiBUTlON OF /=)LLCprrLe" T^N I, \QZS 

 ToT«i- NoMB.G'R \,StT,ooo H6T 



• EACH DOT ;,00O HI 



Some Favorable Asjyects of the Beef Cattle Situation. 



In the Agricultural Outlook, issued by the U. S. Department of Agriculture in 

 February (1925), prospects for the beef cattle industry were characterized as being 

 moderately favorable with the promise of 1925 prices averaging somewhat higher 

 than for 1924. Among aspects that were considered favorable were the following: 



(1) The trend toward smaller numbers. Cattle other than milk cows in twelve 

 range states on January 1, 1925 declined 4.6 per cent from the preceding year and 

 were 7.9 per cent below 1922 indicating a downward trend in range cattle production. 



(2) Cattle on feed in the corn belt states on January 1, 1925, were 18 per cent 

 less than on January 1, 1924, with marketings and slaughter in December (1924) 

 the largest since 1919. This is a tangible promise of reduced competition in range 

 cattle markets from well finished cattle next summer and fall, 



(3) The relation of beef to competing commodities especially pork is more favor- 

 able than a year ago (1924). In other words a tendency toward higher pork prices 

 will check substitution of pork for beef if not tend to reverse this competition. Prom- 

 ise of improved industrial conditions in 1925 is also favorable for somewhat larger 

 consumption of beef. 



