Cargando…
76 Cattle Production’s Response to Packing Capacity Disruption
In August 2019, a fire at Tyson’s Finney County, Kansas, beef plant removed approximately 5% of U.S. beef packing capacity for 3 months. Subsequent COVID-19 pandemic-related precautions and workforce illness caused multiple packing plants across the country to decrease or stop production in the spri...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8499133/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skab235.072 |
_version_ | 1784580295579664384 |
---|---|
author | Holland, Ben P Wesley, Kaitlyn R Word, Alyssa B Maxwell, Casey |
author_facet | Holland, Ben P Wesley, Kaitlyn R Word, Alyssa B Maxwell, Casey |
author_sort | Holland, Ben P |
collection | PubMed |
description | In August 2019, a fire at Tyson’s Finney County, Kansas, beef plant removed approximately 5% of U.S. beef packing capacity for 3 months. Subsequent COVID-19 pandemic-related precautions and workforce illness caused multiple packing plants across the country to decrease or stop production in the spring of 2020. Both events resulted in feedlots being unable to ship cattle at optimal finish points or according to projection. Estimates of the number of cattle backlogged during 2020 approach 1 million. Producers were faced with decisions on how to manage finished animals that could not be shipped while considering economic, animal welfare, and animal health outcomes. Many factors further complicated the situation including highly volatile markets, the possibility employee quarantine due to personal or family illness would cause operations to be under-staffed, and shortage of available pens for new cattle. Feeders had the option to slow the rate of growth of finished cattle due to the ability of ruminant animals to utilize low-energy feedstuffs or by calculating programmed rates of gain using the net energy system. Instead, many producers chose to attempt maximal rates of gain hoping persistent growth and feeding margins would offset discounts due to heavy carcass weights and excess fatness when the supply chain began moving again. Regarding new placements, the structure of the beef industry is uniquely developed to absorb cattle in stocker and backgrounding operations. This presentation will review the factors impacting cattle production and provide case-studies related to feeding at maintenance and growth rates, efficiencies, and carcass outcomes of held cattle from an operation and industry level. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8499133 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84991332021-10-20 76 Cattle Production’s Response to Packing Capacity Disruption Holland, Ben P Wesley, Kaitlyn R Word, Alyssa B Maxwell, Casey J Anim Sci Oral Presentations In August 2019, a fire at Tyson’s Finney County, Kansas, beef plant removed approximately 5% of U.S. beef packing capacity for 3 months. Subsequent COVID-19 pandemic-related precautions and workforce illness caused multiple packing plants across the country to decrease or stop production in the spring of 2020. Both events resulted in feedlots being unable to ship cattle at optimal finish points or according to projection. Estimates of the number of cattle backlogged during 2020 approach 1 million. Producers were faced with decisions on how to manage finished animals that could not be shipped while considering economic, animal welfare, and animal health outcomes. Many factors further complicated the situation including highly volatile markets, the possibility employee quarantine due to personal or family illness would cause operations to be under-staffed, and shortage of available pens for new cattle. Feeders had the option to slow the rate of growth of finished cattle due to the ability of ruminant animals to utilize low-energy feedstuffs or by calculating programmed rates of gain using the net energy system. Instead, many producers chose to attempt maximal rates of gain hoping persistent growth and feeding margins would offset discounts due to heavy carcass weights and excess fatness when the supply chain began moving again. Regarding new placements, the structure of the beef industry is uniquely developed to absorb cattle in stocker and backgrounding operations. This presentation will review the factors impacting cattle production and provide case-studies related to feeding at maintenance and growth rates, efficiencies, and carcass outcomes of held cattle from an operation and industry level. Oxford University Press 2021-10-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8499133/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skab235.072 Text en © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com. https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_modelThis article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model) |
spellingShingle | Oral Presentations Holland, Ben P Wesley, Kaitlyn R Word, Alyssa B Maxwell, Casey 76 Cattle Production’s Response to Packing Capacity Disruption |
title | 76 Cattle Production’s Response to Packing Capacity Disruption |
title_full | 76 Cattle Production’s Response to Packing Capacity Disruption |
title_fullStr | 76 Cattle Production’s Response to Packing Capacity Disruption |
title_full_unstemmed | 76 Cattle Production’s Response to Packing Capacity Disruption |
title_short | 76 Cattle Production’s Response to Packing Capacity Disruption |
title_sort | 76 cattle production’s response to packing capacity disruption |
topic | Oral Presentations |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8499133/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skab235.072 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hollandbenp 76cattleproductionsresponsetopackingcapacitydisruption AT wesleykaitlynr 76cattleproductionsresponsetopackingcapacitydisruption AT wordalyssab 76cattleproductionsresponsetopackingcapacitydisruption AT maxwellcasey 76cattleproductionsresponsetopackingcapacitydisruption |