Cow-Calf News

Heavy Steers and Lean Cows: Drivers of the 2026 Ground Beef Market

Tue, 12 May 2026 16:50:43 GMT

In a market defined by record-breaking prices, an unlikely partnership is driving the value of ground beef: 980-lb. carcasses and the lean cull cows needed to balance them out. While fed cattle weights have reached historic highs, they’ve created a massive surplus of fat trim that requires an equally historic amount of lean blending beef to meet consumer demand. This blending math — combined with tight supplies and a shift in culling patterns — is pushing cull cow prices to new heights.

David Anderson, Texas A&M professor and Extension specialist for livestock and food product marketing, in a recent Southern Ag Today article , summarizes that cull cow prices keep climbing.

“While calf and fed cattle prices have continued to set new record highs in the cash and futures market, cull cow prices have continued their slow ascent to new highs as lean beef prices keep pulling cow prices higher,” Anderson explains. “Southern Plains cull cow auction prices increased to almost $180 per cwt in late April, up about $15 per cwt since January. The seasonal price increase has been smaller than normal this year. Cutter-quality cows have increased about $30 per cwt., almost 25%, since the beginning of the year.”

(USDA-AMS, Livestock Marketing Information Center)

The Blending Effect: Why 980-lb. Carcasses Need Lean Cows

Blending math is the process of mixing high-fat trim from fed cattle with 90% lean beef from cull cows to meet consumer demand for specific ground beef ratios. Anderson stresses one overlooked boost to lean beef prices has been record-large fed cattle dressed weights. Average federally inspected fed steer dressed weights have remained more than 980 lb. per carcass since late 2025.

“Larger carcasses produce additional fat that requires more lean beef for blending to boost its value as ground beef rather than just tallow entering the fats and oils market,” he says.

Glynn Tonsor, Kansas State University professor of agricultural economics, says when the beef industry harvests animals bigger than ever, it is also getting more 50% lean and 50% fat trimmings per animal than ever before. He points out most consumers don’t directly consume 50/50, thus it is an input into ground beef production, and it only works if there is more lean to blend with it.

If there is not enough U.S.-produced lean to blend, the next option is to import lean.

Dairy Culling Shifts and the April Pullback

After exceeding slaughter of a year ago through the first 10 weeks of 2026, dairy cow culling pulled back to year-ago levels during April.

“Dairy cow culling typically peaks in January and February each year, then declines into midyear,” Anderson says. “The decline in dairy cow slaughter has pulled down total cow culling as weekly beef cow slaughter has held at steady but low levels. For the year, total dairy cow slaughter is reported up 6% compared to last year while total cow slaughter (beef and dairy) is down 5%.”

(USDA-AMS and USDA-NASS, Livestock Marketing Information Center)

Beef and dairy cow slaughter is reported weekly by region of the U.S. In recent weeks, Anderson says reported regional cow slaughter data has declined due to confidentiality rules that prevent publication if there are too few buyers to prevent revealing any one operation’s actions.

(USDA-AMS and USDA-NASS, Livestock Marketing Information Center)

“The lack of reporting due to confidentiality concerns has been a problem in fed cattle reporting for many years,” Anderson says. “On the positive side, the weekly national cow slaughter data includes all of the regions, including those that could not be reported regionally.”

2026 projected cow culling is based on year-to-date beef cow slaughter.

(Oklahoma State University)

Retention vs. Liquidation: The Impact of Record Calf Values

Anderson says record-high calf prices are likely keeping cows on the ranch or dairy that otherwise would have been culled to get one more calf out of them. As those calves are born and move to weaning, there may be an increase in culling as those cows come to market.

“Cull prices tend to peak midyear, so there is room for cow prices to continue to increase over the next couple of months,” Anderson says. “Beyond just the seasonal pattern arguing for higher prices, cow culling should continue to be lower than last year, further supporting prices. Beef cow slaughter is expected to remain well below a year ago. Better milk prices should restrain dairy cow culling even though the herd remains large.”

Analyst Predicts Cull Cow Prices Will Remain Elevated

Adding to the discussion on cull cow marketing strategies, Don Close, Terrain chief beef analyst, explains, “Growing up in sale barns we always used to say the best day of the year to sell a used cow is the first day of baseball season. There is some grounding in that date. As soon as grass greens, after a producer has kept her and fed hay all winter, he isn’t going to sell her if he has grass, especially if he thinks she is bred. Once she has calved and grass is available, the producer isn’t inclined to do much unless it is a drought or injury issue. At this point they will wait until fall weaning and cow-sorting time.”

He also points out another driving factor for cull cow prices is the strength of ground beef prices supported with the beginning of the grilling season — prepared-meat manufacturers’ demand is at its peak. Hot dog and lunch meat sales go up as children are out of school and with ballpark hot dog consumption.

(USDA-AMS, Livestock Marketing Information Center)

Your Next Reads:

Through the Flames: Miracles, Heartbreak and the Fight for Nebraska’s Cattle Country

Tue, 24 Mar 2026 22:26:17 GMT

Ranchers Julie and James Hawkins were at the dentist, two hours from their Arthur, Neb., ranch, when they got the call. The smoke was encroaching.

With Julie behind the wheel, and little regard for the speed limit, James was on the phone with their children — Annie, 17, and Ward, 21 — talking them through how to ready the tractor, disc, trucks, trailers and water rig for battle.

When Julie and James arrived back at the ranch around 5:30 p.m., they could see a massive plume.

“It looked like a storm front coming in, and then I realized it was all smoke,” James recalls. “The fire line was several miles wide.”

Frantic calls to the neighbors and the Garden County Sheriff revealed the wildfire was already “2 miles east of Racket Road,” a key landmark that meant it was close.

It was go time. Ward left with the tractor and disc to cut a firebreak around their hay yard. James took the fire truck. Annie followed with a pickup and trailer loaded with horses. Julie hopped in another truck to find their cows.

She expected their cows to be sheltered beneath a hill, but they weren’t there. She took out over the rough terrain to keep looking.

“I topped this ridge, and there’s fire and there’s my cows,” she recalls. “I honked the horn, ‘Come on, girls, let’s go.’ The fire was on my northwest, it was on my west and it had already shot past south, underneath Ward Hill.”

The panic set in because she had left her husband and daughter at Ward Hill filling the water tank on the fire truck.

Julie coaxed the cows to safety down into the valley where her son disced a firebreak to protect their hay yard. James and Annie had outrun the wildfire and made it back to the hay yard. The family turned on its irrigation pivot and moved the horses, trailers, saddles and other valuable equipment behind the pivot for protection.

When Julie Hawkins found her cow herd she also found the fire. She recalls the fire was on her northwest, west and it had already shot past south, underneath Ward Hill.

(Hawkins Family)

A Fire Wall Several Miles Wide Leaves Destruction

The Hawkins family was one of the many ranchers impacted by the historic Morrill Fire that burned more than 642,000 acres.

The “fast-moving, overwhelming event” that started on March 12 devastated pasture and hay resources, describes Dusty Wilson, a fourth-generation cow-calf producer from southwest Arthur County, but it also revealed the strength and generosity of the ranching community.

Northwest winds up to 75 mph meant firefighters’ efforts were no match for the west-to-east threat that escalated quickly, he explains.

Wilson and his 84-year-old father, Delwin, stayed behind to move cattle and fight fire while his wife and kids evacuated.

The father-and-son duo drove to the calving pasture blaring the horn, trying to locate and call the cows in the dark and smoke.

“We had already tried to move a few other bunches, opening gates to give them areas of exit,” Wilson says.

They were unable to locate the cows when they noticed the fire was moving closer and it was time to evacuate. They left the pasture, praying the cows could find protection from the fire.

When the fire reached Wilson’s place he describes the wall of fire was several miles wide, and it “boiled over the hill” right behind his dad’s house, his barn and their shop.

“We almost got trapped,” he recalls. “We were able to find a safe spot, a sandy spot, around a windmill to park and shelter until that wave got around us.”

Both the Hawkins and Wilson families spent Thursday night fighting fire along with their neighbors and volunteer firefighters. Generations of family members, including kids, worked together to help move cows, horses, equipment and pets while other family members scouted fire location and wind shifts.

After the fire at Hawkins’ ranch.

(Hawkins family)

Miracle in the Sandhills: Wilson and Hawkins Herds Survive

The Hawkins family lost more than half the ranch’s summer grazing land. They were able to save their home, hay and cattle.

“It pretty much took most everything, pasture-wise, from all of our surrounding neighbors, as it did us,” Wilson explains.

He lost 13,500 acres of grass and all the hay supplies he had allocated to get the ranch through calving, until turnout, and also for some carryover.

“We were able to save our home valley — our main hay meadow,” Wilson says. “We were able to save our two houses — it burned right up next to each of those. Thankfully, we were able to save our structures. Our cattle, thankfully, were safe.”

He describes the cattle’s survival as miraculous as the pasture around them was charred.

The Wilson family’s cow herd found safety under this big sandhill.

(Wilson Family)

“I fully expected to find a great amount of death loss,” Wilson says when he went to check on the cows the next morning. “I was just amazed when I saw they were safe and unharmed. They were able to tuck under one big sandhill and were in one spot under that hill where the fire didn’t burn. There was a halo or arc that remained where it didn’t burn.”

He’s not sure if the cows heard the horn or if they simply relied on their instincts to find safety.

With no grazing for the coming season, Wilson says the biggest need for Sandhills ranchers is hay and feed.

“We’re going to have to supplement these cattle every day for quite some time now. Our hope is that we can keep everything that’s going to calve here.”

(Adam Grabenstein)

Across the Miles, More Acres Burn Due to Wildfire

On the same day, more than 100 miles away, the Cottonwood Fire was burning in Lincoln and Dawson counties south of I-80.

Adam Grabenstein lives 10 miles south of Gothenburg along Highway 47, where the Cottonwood Fire began. Between 8:30 and 9 p.m., the fire crossed Highway 47 and within 45 minutes, it was on his doorstep.

The Cottonwood Fire approacing Adam Grabenstein’s home near Gothenburg.

(Adam Grabenstein)

“The wind was horrible,” he recalls. “Fifty to 60 mph sustained winds. You couldn’t see for the dust or the smoke, extremely, extremely dangerous conditions.”

Thanks to the efforts of local farmers, they were able to stop the fire about 4 miles north of the Highway 23 and 47 junction, east of Farnam.

“A lot of farmers hooked up their tractors and discs and hightailed it over there to help us stop the fire,” he explains. “When the wind switched out of the north, all the valley farmers brought their tractors and discs. When the wind switched again, it was kind of a reversal with guys from the south country going north. That demonstrates the heart and grit of rural America.”

Fighting fires all night, Grabenstein recalls how neighbors were helping neighbors, stressing the loss could have been much worse.

“There were points when you just felt helpless because the conditions were so ripe for fire — it was out of control,” he recalls of the emotions of that night. “You’re doing all you can, but it’s an extremely dangerous environment.”

His farming and ranching headquarters and feedlot are 10 miles south of his house.

The view from Adam Grabenstein’s home after the fire.

(Adam Grabenstein)

“My house is safe, but obviously we had a lot of smoke damage,” he says. “We’ve lost more than 2,500 acres of grazing lands.”

The difference between the Cottonwood and Morrill fire is terrain and fire fuel. Much of the Cottonwood fire included cedar trees and other wooded areas. To date, the Cottonwood Fire has burned more than 129,000 acres.

The Loss of a Neighbor

The Morrill wildfire claimed the life of 86-year-old Rose White of Arthur County.

Both the Hawkins and Wilsons called her a beloved neighbor who loved Halloween and hosting her neighbors and their children.

“Across the hills from where we were gathering cows, she lives about 3.5 miles southwest,” Julie explains.

White got stuck trying to leave her homestead, which had stood for more than 100 years. Reports say they found her about 15 feet from her vehicle. The whole place — the barn, house and vehicle — all burned.

Wilson says White lived 2 miles north of his ranch. Knowing her his entire life, he recalls the devastation he felt when he heard she died when he was still fighting fire on Thursday night.

“She’s a longtime family friend and was a longtime neighbor. We loved Rose,” he says. “She was a sweet, dear lady, always very friendly, happy and had a joyous personality. We’ll definitely miss her.”

When the Adrenaline Fades: The Hidden Toll on Ranchers

With little spring or summer grazing land left and most of their hay inventory burned, numerous Nebraska cow-calf ranchers are leaning on donated feed, disaster aid and tight-knit ranching communities to overcome the tremendous loss due to wildfires. The fires that ignited on March 12 continue to burn at 98% containment.

“We’ve had just terrific response from ranchers in other communities donating hay and fencing supplies or offering to come help with labor,” Wilson says. “The outpour of generosity has been amazing.”

There’s no doubt split-second choices and the grit to fight for their land and livestock defined how producers survived the recent wildfires.

“God is a big God, and he can send rains and heal our land, yet the damage that has been done is going to take time to heal,” Julie summarizes.

Reflecting on past blizzards, droughts and fires, Wilson adds: “There’s always challenges, there’s always loss. But I think the heart of the Sandhills people, and with the grit of the Nebraska Sandhills rancher, we’re going to continue that heritage and tradition, accept this head on and rebuild what we can and keep moving forward.”

Your Next Reads:
Ranchers Rally as Nebraska Faces Historic Wildfires
Historic Wildfires Continue to Scorch Western and Central Nebraska
After Wildfire: Livestock Care, Documentation and Recovery
Using the D.A.R.T. Method to Identify Smoke-Stressed Calves

How Will U.S. Producers Maintain Business when New World Screwworm Invades?

Wed, 11 Mar 2026 19:59:34 GMT

With animal disease, prevention and preparation beat panic. Since New World screwworm (NWS) was last eradicated from the U.S. in the 1960s, the tools and infrastructure to deal with foreign animal disease have dramatically changed.

Dr. Justin Smith, Kansas animal health commissioner and state veterinarian, during the recent Kansas State University Cattlemen’s Day gave an update on how Kansas and other states are preparing for NWS. The approach is designed to keep producers in business, keep cattle and products moving, and manage NWS in a way that protects both herds and markets.

He says the U.S. animal health officials along with USDA are planning a multistate, coordinated response that aims for consistency across state borders.

Smith summarizes the industry’s preparation to tackle NWS is like a three-legged stool. U.S. producers will be able to maintain business when NWS invades through surveillance, treatment and movement controls.

Surveillance: Eyes on Animals

The first leg of the stool is surveillance. He stresses early detection depends heavily on producers and veterinarians watching animals closely and reporting anything suspicious.

Smith emphasizes they would rather over investigate than miss a case.

“We want to make sure that we err on the side of having to say no on many occasions, versus saying, ‘Yep, this is what we got.’ Eyes on animals is going to be key.”

He was clear this should feel like partnership, not policing.

“They don’t want it to look like Big Brother coming over your shoulder,” he explains. “I hope we want to get this thing quickly.”

Smith explains that once a positive premises is identified, surveillance becomes structured around zones. The infested premises sit at the center, surrounded by an infested zone, an adjacent surveillance zone and a broader fly surveillance area.

The infested zone is 12.4 miles in radius from the infested premises. In this zone, there will be frequent on‑animal checks for wounds and larvae, plus enhanced monitoring in surrounding zones using fly traps and animal observation. The adjacent surveillance zone is another 12.4 miles radius and then there will be a fly surveillance area — an 124-mile radius from the infested premises.

Smith says movements out of the infested zone will require visual inspection for wounds and systemic treatment, including a treatment window of three to 14 days before movement plus a documented certificate of veterinary inspection.

He says the current Kansas response plan aligns with USDA’s playbook and neighboring states’ plans while taking into account specific needs of the Kansas livestock industry.

He stresses the playbook will continue to evolve, and state-by-state implementation may vary, but he says the “zone approach” will be utilized by all states.

Treatment: Limited Tools, Use Strategically

The second leg is treatment. Smith says that after decades without large domestic outbreaks, labeled options are limited.

From the fact that we haven’t had this new tool in our nation, in a large-spread outbreak since the 60s, we don’t have a lot of treatments out there that are labeled for this organism.”

To date, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved four products for large animals:

He cautions, “The goal is not to go out there and just habitually treat your animals just in case. We want to make sure that we’re utilizing these [products] responsibly. There’s not an unlimited supply out there, and so we want to make sure that it’s available for us when we do need it.”

On a positive premises, Smith says treatment will be mandatory and systematic.

“There will be a quarantine placed on that premises. We’re also going to require a certain level of treatment on that premises,” he explains.

There will be protocols for daily mortality disposal, so carcasses don’t become breeding sites.

“The last thing you want to do is bury an animal that has larvae and has the ability to advance.”

He says treatment is also tied to movement out of infested zones, with most animals needing prophylactic treatment before leaving.

Movement Controls: Targeted, Not Statewide Shutdowns

The third leg is movement control, designed to be precise rather than broad-brush. Smith stresses NWS is an infestation, not an infection , emphasizing it is not a systemic disease problem, but an infestation that still demands strong controls.

He says there will be movement restrictions if a premises falls into an infested region. To move animals out of that zone, there will be steps to follow but movement will not be completely shut down.

He explains some exceptions exist:

Animals moving directly to slaughter can go without pre‑movement treatment, but those animals have to be hanging on the rail within 72 hours.
Baby dairy calves must be treated but can move right away if treatment and navel care are documented.

He says Kansas is also coordinating with neighboring states to create “synergistic” rules, especially for cattle from higher‑risk states such as Texas. Cattle entering Kansas from recognized infested zones will face inspection, treatment requirements and at least 14 days in drylot containment on arrival.

NWS is Not a Food Safety Issue

Smith reassures producers and consumers that NWS is not a meat safety threat.

“This is not a food safety issue,” he says. “If an animal is presented to slaughter, it has a screwworm wound then it has the ability to be trimmed. That carcass will not be condemned. There are no restrictions on any inspected product for food safety reasons.”

Smith summarizes underpinning all three legs is a commitment to dynamic planning and continuity. He notes a revised USDA playbook is forthcoming and that “plans will be a little bit dynamic” as they learn more.

The core message for producers is clear: watch your cattle, report early, use treatments wisely and expect targeted movement controls — not blanket shutdowns — if NWS crosses the border.

USDA Announces Sterile Fly Production Facility Construction Contract

USDA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) announced March 9 a construction contract with Mortenson Construction to build a new sterile fly production facility at Moore Air Base in Edinburg, Texas.

This facility is a key component in U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins’ sweeping 5-prong strategy to fight NWS. USACE is partnering with USDA and will provide oversight for the contract, design, engineering and construction of the facility.

“The Army Corps of Engineers is an essential partner in bringing this facility to life and further highlights the Trump Administration’s government-wide effort to fight the New World Screwworm threat in Mexico,” Rollins says. “The Army Corps is the best in the business and their engineering expertise and proven track record in delivering complex projects will help ensure we can build a modern, resilient facility that protects American agriculture from invasive pests for decades to come. This first-of-its-kind facility on U.S. soil will ensure we are not reliant on other countries for sterile flies.”

A sterile fly production facility is a specialized biosecure complex where NWS flies are raised and sterilized using irradiation and then released into targeted areas.

USDA currently produces about 100 million sterile flies per week at the COPEG facility in Panama and disperses them within and just north of affected areas in Mexico. In addition to the COPEG facility in Panama, USDA invested $21 million to support Mexico’s renovation of an existing fruit fly facility in Metapa , which will double NWS production capacity once complete.

With ongoing support from APHIS technical experts, Mexico anticipates sterile fly production will begin at this facility in summer 2026. The new facility at Moore Air Base will be the only U.S.-based sterile fly production facility and will work in tandem with facilities in Panama and Mexico to help eradicate the pest and protect American agriculture.

USDA and USACE will break ground on this new facility later this spring, after initial planning and development meetings with the new contractor. By November 2027, the production facility at Moore Air Base is expected to reach its initial goal of producing 100 million sterile flies per week. After that, construction will continue at the facility to increase production with the long-term goal of producing 300 million sterile flies per week.

After the Fire: The Need for Feed, Fence and Prayers

Mon, 23 Feb 2026 21:19:02 GMT

Wildfires plagued the Plains last week from southern Kansas into Oklahoma and Texas. Hundreds of thousands of acres of grass are now burned to sand.

The Ranger Road Fire, which started in Oklahoma and made its way into southern Kansas, to date has burned more than 283,000 acres and is 65% contained as of Monday morning, according to the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry .

The Oklahoma Forestry Services reports moderated fire weather over dormant fuels resulted in a downtick in wildfire activity over the weekend, allowing firefighters to improve the containment of recent large fires.

“Conditions also supported opportunity to execute burn plans for prescribed fires,” the report says. “If you engaged in prescribed burning, controlled burns or pile burns over the weekend, please ensure that fire perimeters are mopped up and secured ahead of increasing fire weather concerns Tuesday through the remainder of the week.”

Read more about how strong winds, above-average warmth and months of worsening dryness created a “perfect recipe”

for wildfires across the Southern Plains, scorching pasture and farmland — with little moisture relief in the forecast:

Why the Southern Plains Became a ‘Perfect Recipe’ for Wildfire

The wildfires have left a path of heartbreak and devastation. From the loss of livestock and homes, barns and shops to pastures and fence, the damage is hard to fathom.

Oklahoma Secretary of Agriculture Blayne Arthur visited Oklahoma producers impacted by the wildfires on Thursday. “Please pray for our farmers and ranchers and our first responders who continue to battle challenging fires and weather,” she says.

1 of 3:

Secretary of Agriculture Blayne Arthur

2 of 3:

Secretary of Agriculture Blayne Arthur

3 of 3:

Secretary of Agriculture Blayne Arthur

Dr. Randall Spare, Ashland Veterinary Center Inc., says nine years after the losses resulting from the Starbuck Wildfire — still the largest, most extensive wildfire in Kansas history — many of the same ranchers have been affected by the Ranger Road Fire.

Spare explains the wildfire was unstoppable with little farmland or breaks to get ahead of the fire plus the extreme wind. The fire started near Beaver, Okla., at 11 a.m., and he reports many ranchers in the path were moving cattle by noon. He says the highest losses occurred where there were no nearby wheat fields or safe pasture alternatives for the cattle.

“When you have contiguous grass for 90 miles, and the fire line was 90 miles long, from Beaver, Okla. to Protection, Kan., and it was moving 70 miles an hour, it’s hard to get in front of it,” he says.

He also explains because of the good moisture in 2025 and good stewardship of the land, there was a lot of tall, dense forage to fuel the fire.

“Many of the best stewards — those who don’t overgraze and stockpile grass for calving and drought management — actually experienced some of the worst damage,” he explains. “Because they’ve done a good job of managing their grass and have forage to eat in the spring of the year before the growing season starts to calve on, they experienced some of the greatest damage.”

Spare says the Ranger Road Fire took the same path as the Starbuck Fire, but it did not burn as many acres in Kansas — about one-third less in comparison.

“The good thing is it did not go north of Ashland. It’s five miles south of Ashland before it starts and not near the acreage burned,” he summarizes. “Since it isn’t like the Starbuck Fire, we have an opportunity as neighbors to help neighbors, whereas before we couldn’t do that because we were all affected.”

He predicts producers in Kansas lost 1,000 to 1,100 head. He adds there will continue to be more loss as producers evaluate cattle condition.

“One of the biggest damage is feet,” he explains. “The walls of their hooves start to fall off due to the fire. And sometimes that doesn’t show up for five days.”

How Can You Help?

According to Reuters , other fires have burned thousands more acres in Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas.

In agriculture, community is strong. When one producer hurts we all feel it and, if possible, we step up and help our neighbors in need. Along with prayers, Spare adds the immediate needs are:

Hay
Money (financial support)

In response to producers offering help, Spare shares a list of ways others can support ranchers recovering from the wildfires on social media, including lessons learned from the Starbuck Fire.

“I would like to share what we learned from the Starbuck Fire that, hopefully, will be helpful as you consider making decisions about how to help,” he writes.

Fencing supplies: “After the Starbuck Fire, we learned that if federal funds are used to rebuild and replace fences, the construction requirements to access those funds are very specific regarding type of wire, posts, etc. While the generosity of those giving nine years ago was remarkable, we were limited in how much of the donated resources actually could be used simply because federal loss recovery funds needed to be used, and the donated fencing supplies didn’t meet government specifications.”
Money: “Today, money is the most precious resource and in the greatest need. Many of the ranching operations affected need time to truly assess their losses. Some are finding cattle they first thought to be lost, alive and safe. Others are experiencing the opposite and unfortunately are seeing the losses increase.”
Available pasture and grassland: “If you have pasture available either short term or long term, please reach out to Ashland Community Foundation, Kansas Livestock Association or Ashland Veterinary Center,” he suggests.
Hay: There are designated drop off locations ready to accept loads of hay.

Multiple organizations have stepped up and are organizing supplies and assistance.

• Kansas Livestock Association. KLA is helping connect those wishing to donate with the most suitable drop location. If you’re hoping to donate goods including livestock feed or hay, you can contact KLA at (785) 273-5115, or visit this website . On KLA’s Facebook page you can find posts from feedlots that are offering pen space to wildfire victims.

• The Ashland Community Foundation. ACF is accepting monetary donations to help those affected by the fires in their community. To donate, please visit the ACF website and select “Become A Partner” in the dropdown. Donations are also being accepted at Stockgrowers State Bank or can be mailed to ACF at P.O. Box 276, Ashland, KS 67831.

• Oklahoma Cattlemen’s Foundation. OCF has established a relief fund to help cattle producers who have been affected. As the 501(c)(3) charitable arm of the Oklahoma Cattlemen’s Association, the fire relief fund at the Oklahoma Cattlemen’s Foundation will distribute 100% of received funds to affected cattle producers. You can give online or make checks payable to Oklahoma Cattlemen’s Foundation with “Fire Relief” in the memo line and mail to P.O. Box 82395, Oklahoma City, OK 73148.

• Beaver County Stockyards and Beaver County OSU Extension office. For those willing to donate feed or hay to the Beaver County, Okla., area, visit the Stockyards website or the Extension office website .

• Beaneighbor.org . The Oklahoma Healthcare Authority, provides access to local support including financial assistance, food pantries, medical care, and other free or reduced-cost help. Search for aid in your area at Beaneighbor.org.

Oklahoma Department of Agriculture, Food, and Forestry reminds the public to use caution before bringing hay to northwest Oklahoma to prevent the spread of invasive fire ants. Find out if your county is under quarantine for fire ants on the USDA website

Fire Weather is Not Over: Stay Prepared

The Kansas Forest Service reminds producers there are still months of fire season to come.

“As firefighters continue to mop up or extinguish hot spots along miles of fire line, recovery begins for the communities most impacted by recent wildfires,” the agency says. “Many wildfire managers are already preparing for the next round of fire weather.”

While recovery and readiness are happening at the same time, the forest service share these two tips:

Learn how to prepare your home and property for a wildfire. Proper preparation can help your home withstand a wildfire.
Have a plan when the wildfire is heading toward your home or property.

Texas A&M AgriLife Extension has a Fires & Wildfires website dedicated to providing resources to help prepare for and survive wildfires.

A Note to Survivors

Spare says his message to producers who are recovering from the wildfires is to:

Think beyond today. Plan not only for immediate survival but for summer grazing and next winter’s feed. Recognize that hay now is also about having feed later, since grass is gone.
Don’t be afraid to ask for help. “If you are struggling, reach out to a trusted friend and accept neighbor and outside assistance,” he stresses.

Spare summarizes producers from his area are deeply appreciative and humbled by people from across the country who helped nine years ago and are helping again now, even to the point that local folks feel “almost embarrassed” it happened again.

“But it is life, and we’re going to trust God and go on,” he says.

Your Next Read: Tips for Care Following Wildfire

The Cattleman's Call That Never Fades: Scott Wolverton’s Journey From Farm to Fame

Wed, 11 Feb 2026 14:08:43 GMT

For Scott Wolverton , the path to Nashville didn’t begin under bright stage lights or inside a recording studio. It started on a cattle farm in southeast Nebraska — where early mornings, livestock chores and county fairs were simply part of everyday life.

Raised on a cow-calf operation in Seward, Neb., Wolverton grew up immersed in agriculture. He started taking guitar lessons when he was 10. He says music was always there, but it wasn’t always the priority.

“I grew up on a small cattle farm,” Wolverton says. “We have a cow-calf operation back home. I grew up playing music here and there, but it really took the back burner to football, baseball, wrestling, 4-H events, showing cattle and doing all that stuff.”

Agriculture wasn’t just something Wolverton participated in. It was embedded in his family.

“My dad’s a veterinarian back home in Seward. He has a small cow-calf operation, K.A.W. Red Angus, and that’s what we would show cattle through and do all that stuff, 4-H projects,” Wolverton says. “My mom works for 4-H Extension out of Seward County. She helps with after-school programs for kids. She helps the county fair set up, running this county fair, hiring judges, all the livestock shows. She does a lot of that.”

Wolverton, his older brother and twin sister were raised around livestock, showing both Red Angus cattle and horses. It was those experiences on the farm and showing livestock that prepared him for the challenges of building a career in Nashville.

“I feel like I learned a lot about responsibility and work ethic just through working with animals, working with my dad and my siblings on the farm and doing just everyday things out there,” Wolverton says.

(Provided by Scott Wolverton)

A Chance Introduction That Changed Everything

Growing up, Wolverton’s interests were split between 4-H and athletics. Baseball, in particular, became a major focus. In college, he majored in agronomy — a natural extension of his agricultural upbringing — while also pursuing baseball seriously enough that it eventually became his career. Wolverton coached at Hutchinson Community College in Kansas, and during that time, he quietly began recording music on his own.

What he didn’t expect was that a casual connection would open a door he never saw coming. The coaches he worked with introduced him to a man who would eventually become his manager.

That manager, Zach, happened to be in Hutchinson one night when an opportunity surfaced almost out of nowhere — a chance for Wolverton to open for country artist Riley Green in Salt Lake City the very next day.

“I was like, ‘OK, that’s awesome. I don’t know if I’m going to get there. That’s about 21 hours away,’” Wolverton says. “And he said, ‘We’ll just fly you out, and then fly you back on Friday.’ And so I flew out Thursday morning, played the show Thursday night, and flew back on a Friday morning. And I’m back in time for practice that afternoon.”

The experience was fast, surreal and life-altering for a farm kid from Nebraska.

“It was kind of surreal in the moment. The Riley Green thing kind of came out of the blue,” Wolverton says. “And it was one of those things where you’re kind of like, it happened so quickly. In the moment I was kind of like, ‘Is this really where I’m at right now?’ Because it happened in less than 24 hours. I was on a plane and back in Kansas.”

That moment set Wolverton on a new path — one that eventually led him to Nashville and a full-time pursuit of country music. But even as his career shifted, his connection to agriculture never faded.

(Provided by Scott Wolverton)

His Inspiration

Wolverton says his main inspiration as a songwriter comes from home and how he was raised — the work, love and lifestyle he learned growing up around cattle.

“A lot of my inspiration comes from home,” Wolverton says. “It comes from where I grew up, what I grew up doing, that west country life, I guess. It’s very simple, but a lot of it has to do with work ethic, my faith, that kind of lifestyle.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Scott Wolverton (@scottywolverton)

His Most Personal Song Yet

One of his most personal songs, “ Cattleman’s Call ,” draws directly from his upbringing and a sound that defined his childhood.

“My dad has always done that cow, the ‘come-boss,’ cattle call, and it’s always been such a fascinating thing to me because growing up as a little kid, you hear your dad scream and you’re like, ‘What was that?’” Wolverton explains. “And then you kind of learn about it, but it’s so amazing the cows always come right when he calls. They’ll perk their heads up and you can see them just start walking because they know they’re going to get taken care of.”

That cattle call became more than a memory. It became a metaphor and a message.

“My parents have been my rock throughout college baseball and just life in general,” he says. “My dad’s always called me and he’s always been very reassuring of, ‘Hey man, if anything ever happens, you fall flat on your face, you can always come home.’ And so, I tried really hard to relate that cattle call to that feeling, and that’s kind of where that inspiration really came from.”

Released last summer, “Cattleman’s Call” serves as both a tribute to his father and a reflection of the values Wolverton learned growing up in agriculture — values that continue to guide him in an industry that demands persistence and grit.

“Working in any branch of agriculture, a lot of it is hard work. It takes a lot of discipline, it takes a lot of hard work, it take a lot know-how or ‘figure it out,’” Wolverton says. “And the music industry is not a whole lot different from that. It’s really difficult. There’s a lot people doing it. You kind of got to find a way to stand out. And I feel very prepared in that way through the hard work and the dedication that I learned through working with animals, through working on the farm.”

From cattle country to country music, Scott Wolverton’s journey is rooted in the land and shaped by the lessons learned on a Nebraska farm. No matter how far the road takes him, the call of home is never far away.

U.S. Cattle Inventory Hits 75-Year Low at 86.2 Million Head

Fri, 30 Jan 2026 21:08:09 GMT

As of Jan. 1, 2026, the U.S. beef cattle herd stands at 86.2 million head, continuing a downward trend. Despite a year of strong prices, USDA’s annual Cattle Inventory Report released Friday shows the U.S. cattle inventory shrank another 0.35% and now sits at its smallest size in 75 years.

“I would say the story continues,” summarizes Derrell Peel, extension livestock marketing specialist from Oklahoma State University. “I mean, it really doesn’t change the pattern that we’ve been in for the last three years now.”

Quick Report Stats:

Total Cattle and Calves Inventory: 86.2 million head (Down 0.35%)
Beef Cow Herd: 27.6 million head (Down 1%)
2025 Calf Crop: 32.9 million head (Smallest since 1941)
Beef Replacement Heifers: 4.71 million head (Up 1%)

Patrick Linnell, CattleFax director of market research, calls the report bullish.

“I think the big picture message of this report is expansion, while there was some signs of it within this report, by and large expansion remains elusive at this point,” he says.

What Are the Big Takeaways from the USDA Report?

According to Peel, the data highlights two critical areas:

1. Shrinking Cow Herd: The beef cow inventory fell 1% to 27.6 million head.
“The industry technically got a little smaller in 2025,” Peel says.

Linnell adds, “As you looked at just how tight beef cow slaughter was this past year, us and other groups had expected we would actually see an increase in the beef cow herd. Small, but an increase nonetheless. However, that’s not what this report showed.”

2. Heifer Retention Signs: Beef replacement heifers rose 1% to 4.71 million.
“There was a slight uptick in beef replacement heifers, not enough to amount to any growth in 2026, or probably even in 2027, but maybe it’s the beginnings [of a rebuild].”

John Nalivka, Sterling Marketing Inc. president, says the report indicates while replacement heifers was up 1% and those expected to calve were also up 1% from 2024 or 17% of the beef cow herd.

“From 2015 to 2018 when producers began aggressively building herds, the average number of heifers that were identified as replacements on the Jan. 1 inventory was 6.2 million or an average heifer retention rate of 21%,” he explains.

Nalivka says heifer slaughter during 2025, at 9.5 million, was down 7% from the prior year but still represented 52% of the heifers weighing more than 500 lb. on Jan. 1, 2025. In 2024, the industry slaughtered 56% of the January 1 heifers weighing more than 500 lb.

“When the industry was retaining heifers to build herds, the percentage of heifers weighing over 500 lb. that were slaughtered ranged from 39% to 49%,” he adds.

Why is the 2025 Calf Crop Significant?

The calf crop estimate was reduced to 32.9 million head — a 2% drop from 2024. This marks the smallest U.S. calf crop since 1941. This scarcity will be the primary driver for market dynamics in the coming years.

The calf crop in 1941 was approximately 31.8 million head. While the industry saw a significant liquidation in 2014, the calf crop that year only dropped to roughly 33.5 million. This means the current contraction has pushed production levels back more than 80 years.

Outlook: What Will Cattle and Beef Prices Do in 2026?

Peel predicts the small calf crop and tightening feeder supplies will push prices even higher.

“We’ve got record-high prices, and we’re going to see them push even higher for cattle and beef,” Peel says.

He reminds producers it’s important to keep in mind that it’s not just about supply.

“Demand has also continued to be remarkably good for beef as prices have gone up,” he says. “Beef prices have increased relative to pork and poultry. There are alternative proteins that consumers could be turning to, and they’re not. So that’s a very positive sign from a beef industry standpoint.”

The “Historically Slow” Rebuild

Unlike the rapid expansion seen 10 years ago, Peel expects this cycle to be much slower. Producers are cautious, remembering how quickly record prices vanished in the past.

“I do think we’re probably beginning, but it’s certainly not a concerted effort,” Peel says. “There’s not a strong, broad-based initiative in the industry. It will probably grow, but I think it’s going to continue to grow pretty slowly.”

He explains the industry has outlasted the previous cycle highs by two-plus years.

“I think producers are coming around to the idea that this is a more sustained story,” Peel says.

What is the Take-Home Message for Producers?

The market is signaling a desperate need for a rebuild.

“The incentive is there, the value of forage is there,” he says. “If you’ve got forage you can use to raise calves, the market wants you to do that. And if you aren’t fully stocked, then it’s encouraging you to think about doing that. I think the main message for producers is to take advantage of this market.”

He also encourages producers to maintain the productivity of their herds.

“We have cut cow culling so far in the last two to three years that some of these cows are going to have to be culled going forward,” he explains. “So, we got to have a few more replacement heifers just to maintain the productivity of the herd. Take care of that first and then if you need to restock. I understand the tradeoff between selling them now for what is a record price versus investing in the future, but you know, sooner or later, we have to make that investment and look a little bit farther down the road.”

Other January cattle report highlights include:

Of the 86.2 million head inventory of all cattle and calves, cows and heifers that have calved totaled 37.2 million.
The number of milk cows in the U.S. increased 2% to 9.57 million.
The number of cattle on feed was down 3% to 13.8 million.

Nalivka adds, “Only time will tell as the year progresses to determine if USDA’s Cattle Inventory is on track. One cross-check will be cattle slaughter which is an actual number reported to USDA by the packers. The inventory is generated from an annual survey number. I understand that USDA aligns annual surveys with the five-year Agricultural Census. To say the least, I have greater confidence in numbers reported to USDA that can cross-check the validity of the survey.”

He does not expect the Cattle Inventory Report to have an impact on cattle numbers or the market going forward through 2026 and into 2027, particularly with a 2% smaller 2025 calf crop.

“Numbers will continue to tighten and when coupled with continued strong demand for beef will support the market at levels at and likely above the market peak seen during third quarter 2025,” he summarizes.

Glynn Tonsor, Kansas State University ag economist, posted on LinkedIn his analysis of the report. He shares state-level beef cow inventory estimates (of seven states with more than 1 million head) Kansas’ 7% decline stands out while Missouri, Montana, Nebraska and Texas are estimated to be down 1-3% and Oklahoma and South Dakota are flat. Only Texas has a sizeable increase in estimated replacement heifers.

He shares two broader points:

While it certainly is valuable to count the number of beef cows, understand status of herd expansion, and other factors that is far from a complete story on industry supply dynamics. In short, the industry has implemented a number of efficiency gains resulting in the net effect of more edible beef production per cow in the industry.
It has become way too common to focus on supply and overlook demand dynamics. In fact, recent work with Brian Coffey documents how recent beef price patterns have been impacted more by strong consumer beef demand than any supply-side adjustments .

Analyzing the inventory numbers Peel summarizes, “It’s just amazing to me that we continue down this path. We’ve kept extending the timeline. You know, technically, with the beef cow herd and the way we look at cattle cycles, I thought 2025 would turn out to be officially the low. Well, now we’re even smaller in 2026, so we will have to wait until next year’s number to see whether this is the low. We just keep pushing this timeline out that provides even more opportunities for producers to take advantage of this market.”

Bi-annual Cattle report would be called lightly positive. 1) There was no sign of any type of January 2015 expansion (retained beef heifers +9.5%). 2) Overall, numbers came in just below the four analyst expectation. pic.twitter.com/lvNaDBusz3
— Rich Nelson (@RichNelsonMkts) January 30, 2026

To obtain an accurate measurement of the current state of the U.S. cattle industry, NASS surveyed approximately 35,000 operators across the nation during the first half of January. Surveyed producers were asked to report their cattle inventories as of Jan. 1, 2026, and calf crop for the entire year of 2025 by internet, mail, telephone or in-person interview.

Your Next Reads:
Tightest Cattle Supply Predicted in The Next 60 to 90 Days
CattleFax Predicts Profitability Despite Increased Uncertainty

Record Breaking Winter Storm Fern Slams Farmers and Ranchers in 28 States

Tue, 27 Jan 2026 02:51:12 GMT

Winter Storm Fern will go down in the record books with a large swath of the U.S. and farm country blanketed with a foot or more of snow, ice and record-breaking cold.

Eric Snodgrass, Nutrien Ag senior science fellow, says: “We had 28 states under at least an ice storm warning or a winter storm warning. And the thing started in New Mexico and finished in Maine and along the way dumped a tremendous amount of snow. A massive ice storm that stretched from what Dallas to Memphis to Nashville.”

(Eric Snodgrass )

Hundreds of Thousands Without Power

That heavy ice caused hundreds of thousands of power outages that will last for days or even weeks in some areas. Early estimates on Monday morning by PowerOutage.com put total power outages at over 782,000 customers, mainly across the Southeast U.S. The hardest hit states included Tennessee at just under 250,000 and Mississippi and Maine at nearly 150,000. By Monday evening total power outages were still at more than 550,000.

(Eric Snodgrass )

Record Low Temperatures

Farmers and ranchers worked over the weekend to protect livestock from this historic winter blast. Hundreds of locations also surpassed unofficial daily records for low temperatures. That combined with dangerous wind chills, stressed livestock and hurt performance and health.

Snodgrass says, “I mean, 30 to 40 degrees colder than normal. I mean, I saw wind chills in Wisconsin, a huge dairy state. wind chills in Wisconsin down to minus 55 over the weekend, and that’s a pretty brutal setup for humans and livestock alike.”

Livestock Producers Work Overtime to Protect Herds

Northwest Louisiana cattle producer Mitch Marsalis worked over the weekend to keep his beef cattle warm with extra grain and feed. “We’re trying to get these calves back to pasture and get everything set up to get them fed, get them some warmth and some food in their bodies to keep them warm during this weather.”

However, the Claiborne Parish rancher told Josh Meeks at This Week in Louisiana Agriculture the 25-degree temperatures are harder on ranchers than livestock. “They’re cold right now, but they’re not as cold as we are. They’re acclimated to this weather a little bit better than we are. You know, they’re not sitting in the house, 70 degrees and then walk outside and get that shock about them and all.”

10 Points to Consider When Managing Cattle Through Cold Stress

Tips to Prevent Hypothermia in Calves

Grain Movement and Processing Also Slowed

Fern has also slowed grain movement from trucks to barges. Plus, ethanol and soybean processing plants have slowed production to conserve margins with surging natural gas prices.

Winter Wheat Winter Kill Concerns

Plus, winter kill is possible in winter wheat in areas like Kansas, says Snodgrass, where the deep freeze was preceded by above average temperatures. “I think the only saving grace is there’s now a little skiff of snow and in eastern Kansas even more than that sitting on top of the ground and on top of the wheat as the Arctic air spills all the way down to the Rio Grande. So I think it’s going to be one of those things where like well in April we will see if there was any damage or any problems.”

How Long Will Polar Vortex Last?

Snodgrass says the bad news is this polar vortex could stick around for a while. “We’ve displaced the polar vortex. It’s now sitting over like the Great Lakes to Hudson Bay. We’ve pinched off warm air over the Arctic, which means we’re displacing it right down the heart of North America. And we’re going to continue to deal with this to finish this month and I think even start February.”

(Eric Snodgrass )

Analog Year in 2014

And so Snodgrass thinks this polar vortex could be similar to analog year of 2014 where the polar vortex was prolonged through February.

Shrinking Slaughter Capacity: What's Next in 2026?

Wed, 24 Dec 2025 17:33:42 GMT

The long-feared rightsizing of shackle spaces to more closely match the number of cattle has begun.

“The market’s reaction to the November announcement was a good reminder that market volatility still exists even when the supply and demand fundamentals continue to be positive forces into the start of 2026,” says Dave Weaber, Terrain senior animal protein analyst, in his Q1 2026 Outlook .

In late November, Tyson Foods announced its plan to end operations at its Lexington, Neb., beef facility and convert its Amarillo, Texas, beef facility to a single, full-capacity shift.

“Terrain estimates the changes will eventually reduce U.S. slaughter capacity by about 6.6%,” Weaber explains. “However, slaughter plant capacity utilization is still nearly 6% behind historical norms, as the number of cattle is still well short of filling available slaughter capacity.”

Weaber predicts this positive shift in operational efficiency will likely encourage plants to fill available capacity and better compete for the available cattle.

“I expect utilization to decline by about 2% during 2026 when two new plants in Nebraska and Missouri complete their startups,” he adds.

A proposed plant in the Panhandle of Texas that would handle 6,000 head per day has the potential to lower utilization rates back to early-2025 levels if completed.

“Even without additional future slaughter capacity, utilization rates will remain low; fed cattle numbers are expected to decline during the next two to three years because of cow-calf producers’ beef cow herd expansion efforts,” Weaber summarizes.

The reduction in current fed slaughter capacity will help the remaining plants run more volume, improving efficiency by spreading fixed and semi-variable costs across more head and pounds of beef. This positive shift in operational efficiency will likely encourage plants to fill available capacity and better compete for the available cattle.

“I expect that in the near and intermediate term, this effect will at least partially offset the shift in market leverage, which currently favors the packer,” Weaber says.

Markets and Beef Prices Remain Resilient

Beyond the near-term impacts to futures traders’ sentiment, the market impacts of the announced closures are fading.

“Calf, feeder cattle and fed cattle cash markets are already recovering and have posted significant rallies,” Weaber says. “Fed cattle supplies for the first half of 2026 are not going to change. The number of cattle placed into feed yards is the number placed and will be the number that gets slaughtered. The location the cattle get processed into beef may change, but overall beef production is mostly set.”

(USDA NASS, Terrain)

He adds: “ Consumer beef demand and spending remain strong and supportive of cattle prices. Presidential and executive branch rhetoric about lowering beef prices has had little to no impact on retail and wholesale beef prices. Tariff reductions on imported lean trimmings from South America are driving volumes, but prices for contracted loads delivering in the first quarter of 2026 are record high, up 20% from a year earlier.”

“I expect the choice cutout to average between $375 per cwt and $385 per cwt and fed cattle prices to average between $234 per cwt and $238 per cwt in Q1.”

— Dave Weaber

Q1 2026 Price Outlook

“I expect available fed cattle supplies during the first quarter of 2026 to be 6% to 7% smaller than the year prior,” Weaber says. “Even with a 2% shift in leverage (fed cattle price to comprehensive cutout) to the packers’ favor, I expect the Choice cutout to average between $375 per cwt and $385 per cwt and fed cattle prices to average between $234 per cwt and $238 per cwt in Q1.”

By early December, light feeder cattle and calf auction prices have recovered much of the losses incurred since late October and appear poised to start 2026 at record levels.

“Changes to the U.S.-Mexico border status remain the greatest known risk for cattle prices,” Weaber stresses.

Further rallies in deferred live cattle futures will drive the balance of the recovery in prices for heavy feeder cattle that make up the CME feeder cattle price index. He explains demand for light cattle to be turned out on wheat pasture and California coastal range has been a key driver for the rally in light cattle.

Biggest Risk Is South of the Border

Changes to the U.S.-Mexico border status remain the greatest known risk for cattle prices.

“The Mexican government has implemented broad cattle movement and import restrictions within the country as well as greater fly control measures in partnership with the USDA,” Weaber says. “Meanwhile, U.S. and Mexican officials have begun inspections of only one border crossing into New Mexico. Additional cases of New World screwworm have been found in Mexico, which I expect to further delay the reopening.”

Active risk management to preserve operation equity should remain a priority.

“If the border were to reopen, cash feeder cattle and calf prices and feeder cattle and live cattle futures would be the first to move down,” Weaber explains. “The magnitude of the impact will depend on the rate-limiting and cost impacts of the protocols that are implemented and the number of backlogged cattle south of the border.”

One Lesson From Plant Closures

“If we’ve learned anything from the market reactions to the plant announcements, it’s that price volatility should be a focus for producers in all segments of the cattle industry,” Weaber says. “Active risk management to preserve operation equity should remain a priority.”

Your Next Reads:
Navigate Market Volatility with Risk Management Strategies

Beef’s Future: Consumer Demand, Risk Management and the Path to Continued Profitability

Wolves Are Not Going Away: Ranchers Push for Practical Management Tools

Thu, 04 Dec 2025 15:08:47 GMT

Ranchers repeatedly stress they are not advocating extermination of the wolves, but workable management solutions.

“We’re trying to be conservationists,” says Luke Morgan, Lightning Bolt Cattle Co. general manager. “Wolves are here to stay. We’ve got to have some tools to make it more holistic for people, wolves and the rest of the animals.”

Morgan manages 2,500 mother cows on multiple locations in Oregon and Washington utilizing both public and private lands. He says the split listing of wolves in Oregon is frustrating: “A line down the middle … federally listed on one side and not on the other … makes zero sense.”

Read more about the challenges rancher are facing with wolves:
Nightly Battles and Big Losses: Ranchers Demand Reform as Wolves Continue to Wreak Havoc

Rick Roberti, California Cattlemen’s Association president and a cattle rancher in Sierra Valley, adds: “We don’t want to get rid of all the wolves. We just want them managed in a way we don’t suffer so many losses — for them to return to their natural habitat.”

Cattle producer Amy Anderson Fitzpatrick says her family has been dealing with wolves since 2011. Her family raises cattle in southern Oregon during the grazing season (May to December), then move the herd to winter in Northern California. The base ranch, called Rancheria Ranch, is in the mountains of Oregon and is a mix of owned land and permitted grazing.

Fitzpatrick explains state and federal laws severely limit ranchers’ ability to defend their livestock; only nonlethal hazing is allowed, and requests to remove or euthanize problematic wolves have been denied.

Here are two requests from the producers dealing with wolves:

1. Coexistence management tools.

This would allow flexible, rapid deployment of nonlethal and, when needed, targeted lethal tools to address habituated wolves near people and livestock.

“They have zero fear of humans,” Morgan says. “If we could instill a little fear, push them back into wilderness areas and keep them more of a wild animal.”

He suggests seasonal, expedited permits and field-response teams during calving; prioritize high-risk allotments and pastures.

Fitzpatrick adds: “Our wolves are not scared of us, because why should they be?”

2. Notification and data transparency for risk management.

Roberti requests for more notification and data sharing regarding wolves. He says with collared wolves, agencies can tell ranchers when wolves enter their property, but he says: “We’ve been getting the reports after the kill.”

He would also like to know how many wolves there are and would like to see a deer survey done.

“If there’s not enough prey, you’re pretty much saying they’re going to eat cattle,” Roberti says.

Fitzpatrick expresses frustration with public perception and how the pro-wolf sentiment on social media downplays or ignores ranchers’ struggles with the predators.

Despite the ongoing hardships, Fitzpatrick says her family remains committed to ranching while calling for a level playing field that would allow effective protection of their livelihood.

Paul Roen, a Sierra County rancher, adds unified, more flexible regulations and continued collaboration between local, state and federal agencies is needed. He advocates for policy reform, increased documentation and knowledge-sharing to better equip rural communities to manage the realities of coexisting with wolves.

Roberti summarizes that sensible management policies will allow both wolves and ranchers to coexist, but he stresses that unless balance is restored and ranchers’ voices are heard, both the rural way of life and broader ecosystem could face severe consequences.

Your Next Read: Nightly Battles and Big Losses: Ranchers Demand Reform as Wolves Continue to Wreak Havoc

Nightly Battles and Big Losses: Ranchers Demand Reform as Wolves Continue to Wreak Havoc

Wed, 03 Dec 2025 18:42:52 GMT

It’s hard to fathom: 92 confirmed or probable kills of cattle by three wolves during one season (April to October 2025) in the Sierra Valley. For ranchers, it’s more than economical loss — the emotional toll of dealing with wolves targeting their livestock and livelihoods is real.

Reintroduction and management of wolves in Sierra County, Calif., has led to significant challenges. The community, led by officials such as Paul Roen, has been actively pushing for updated management protocols, enhanced deterrence measures and better support from state and federal agencies to address the escalating wolf-livestock conflict.

Roen, a Sierra County supervisor (similar to a county commissioner) and rancher, explains it’s more than a livestock issue; it is a human safety issue.

“These wolves were not bothered by humans whatsoever. I mean, they were not acting like wild animals at all,” he says in reference to the wolves killing cattle earlier this year.

Rick Roberti, California Cattlemen’s Association president and a cattle rancher in Sierra Valley, adds: “For every confirmed kill you find, there’s probably four to six others. The wolves had gotten so used to eating cattle they didn’t hardly even look at a deer if they could find one.”

Roen and Roberti both stress the wolves have no fear of humans, with frequent sightings near homes and barns.

The severity of the attacks led Roen and other local officials to declare a state of emergency, drawing statewide and media attention. Despite the efforts of ranchers and local authorities — including constant night patrols, protective measures and deployment of technology like drones — wolf predation persisted. The community also engaged with state and federal resources, including a Strike Force sent by California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to document the losses and explore possible intervention .

The program, designed to prevent livestock attacks on ranching properties in the heavily impacted Sierra Valley, deployed more than 18,000 staff hours across 114 days, engaging in 95 hazing events that helped to prevent an even greater loss in cattle deaths.

Eighteen Sierra Valley ranches enrolled in the program. CDFW staff also assisted ranches in evaluating the use of wolf-deterring fladry and ensuring livestock carcasses are correctly disposed to avoid attracting scavenging wolves. Additionally, the program helped facilitate depredation investigations, enabling ranchers to access compensation through CDFW’s Wolf-Livestock Compensation Program .

Following the unprecedented level of livestock attacks across the Sierra Valley, CDFW, in coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), took the step of lethally removing four gray wolves from the Beyem Seyo pack.

“This action follows months of intensive non-lethal management efforts to reduce livestock loss and is grounded in the best available science and understanding of wolf biology,” according to the press release.

Roen says progress dealing with the wolf issue came with federal involvement and local law enforcement support. He says when the sheriff got involved , people woke up in Sacramento.

Read more about how sheriff departments from seven California counties united to oppose environmental polices they believe threaten ranchers and farmers.

Not Just California

The gray wolf is on the federal endangered species list except in the Northern Rocky Mountain region of Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, the eastern one-third of Oregon, Washington and north-central Utah. In Minnesota, the gray wolf is considered threatened. Because of these protections, killing a wolf in the states where it’s protected is illegal, even if it’s seen killing livestock.

Luke Morgan, Lightning Bolt Cattle Company general manager, has been dealing with wolves since 2011 when they first came to Oregon. Morgan manages 2,500 mother cows on multiple locations in Oregon and Washington using both public and private lands.

A pack of wolves that live on one of the Lightning Bolt ranches in western Oregon have been causing havoc the past couple years. According to Morgan, the wolves killed more than 25 head of livestock from mid-October to mid-November.

He says the wolves prey the weak-minded: “Whatever can’t take the pressure … the ones that will break and run.”

(CDFW)

Cattle producer Amy Anderson Fitzpatrick says her family has also been dealing with wolves since 2011. They raise cattle in southern Oregon during the grazing season (May to December), then move the herd to winter in Northern California. The base ranch, called Rancheria Ranch, is in the mountains of Oregon and is a mix of owned land and permitted grazing. The operation includes commercial cow herd plus some yearlings.

Since 2019, Fitzpatrick says at least 24 cattle deaths have been attributed to wolves, though actual losses are likely higher due to unconfirmed cases in the rugged terrain.

“I have learned far more about wolves and their behavior than I could ever imagine. Wolves kill for food, yes, but they also kill to hone their skills, teach their young and for fun. We have witnessed wolves literally bumping livestock bedded down to get them up and running to chase them,” Fitzpatrick says. “We’ve been dealing with it for about 14 years. … The earlier pack, the Rogue Pack, would hit Fort Klamath hard in the summer months when there was an abundance of yearling cattle, then in the fall they’d come over the hill to Rancheria and hit us. Now we deal with what is known as this Grouse Ridge Pack, which seems to just like to hang out at the ranch and hit our permit country in the summertime.”

Fitzpatrick says they previously anticipated up to five losses per year from cattle turned out on the range as a cost of doing business. With the increase in wolf population, the ranch tallied between 35 and 40 mostly weaned calves during the 2024 season.

The Rogue Pack would kill livestock as sport and not consume the animals. However, the current, larger pack tends to consume more carcasses, further complicating verification.

In Wisconsin over the past 12 months, wolf attacks on livestock have increased. According to the state’s Department of Natural Resources (DNR), there have been 62 livestock depredation incidents in 2025 — 45 killed and 17 confirmed harassments — all of which are either livestock or pets. That’s nearly double the number of incidents reported just three years ago.

According to the Wisconsin Farm Bureau : “Wisconsin’s wolf population has rebounded from extinction to an undeniable conservation success. But lately, it feels more like a horror story than a success story.”

Read more about how ranchers say they are willing to deal with wolves if they will return to their natural habitat:
Wolves Are Not Going Away: Ranchers Push for Practical Management Tools

(Paul Roen)

Financial Loss is Real

Herd-level effects beyond death loss include lower conception rates, 50 lb. to 75 lb. weaning weight declines and cow herd fear. Wolves have changed cattle behavior significantly.

Fitzpatrick says the presence of wolves has caused observable stress and aggression in the cattle, leading to behavioral changes, abortions and decreased weaning weights.

“Wolves actively harass resting cattle, preventing them from relaxing or thriving,” she says.

Morgan says herd experience more vulnerability during calving season. He points out calves and protective dams are high-risk with wolf attacks leading to increasing accidental calf deaths and stress-related herd disruptions.

Research by Tina Saitone, a University of California-Davis professor and cooperative Extension specialist in livestock and rangeland economics, found one wolf can cause up to $162,000 in annual financial loss .

Compensation is Available But Falls Short

Compensation frameworks exist but often lack speed and scope and require confirmations that are often unfeasible. Morgan says there’s not even close to enough funds in the pool to cover all the losses.

“There is money appropriated in California, but we’re just having a hard time getting it,” Roberti adds. “Most have been waiting since April.”

All four producers say depredations are significantly undercounted compared with real losses due to terrain, investigation lags and evidence requirements. A shared frustration is the fact if an animal is nearly completely consumed, the investigators can’t find the evidence it was a wolf attack and thus, it does not count as a wolf depredation.

Emotional Toll is Substantial

For cattle producers impacted by wolves, it’s more than the financial toll; it’s the human factor, the stress incurred.

“Financial-wise, it’s huge. It’s astronomical, if you really dig into it, but the mental capacity it takes from us and the people who work for us is huge,” Morgan says. “The emotional toll we have to go through just watching and observing cattle, and we spend every day we possibly can trying to keep these animals alive.

“There’s nothing pretty about the way [wolves] kill animals,” he continues. “For us to go out and find them or have to deal with that, it’s huge emotionally.”

Fitzpatrick explains the losses due to wolves have deeply affected her dad.

“My dad is 81 years old, and I have never seen him so depressed,” she explains. “He’s not the same; he’s lost the fight. It’s like we’ve lost. How do you put a price tag on that?”

Dealing with wolves it is a safety issue as well, Roberti adds. As producers stay up all night checking on and protecting their cattle. Fitzpatrick agrees, summarizing the stressful steps she takes to check cattle, noting she now avoids certain tasks due to the increased risks to herself and her dogs.

Documenting the events in Sierra County, Roen says he hopes their experiences can be used as a road map for others. He plans to share plans, forms and training materials with ranchers facing similar threats.

“We created different plans and trainings we will allow everybody to plagiarize,” he says.

Your Next Read:
Wolves Are Not Going Away: Ranchers Push for Practical Management Tools

The Cost of Coexistence With Wolves

Profit Meets Purpose: A Rancher's Guide to Sustainable Success

Mon, 01 Dec 2025 15:43:31 GMT

Grazing the best and leaving the rest for the benefit of soil health — this is the philosophy of the Pribbeno family, who has been ranching in the Nebraska Sandhills for 140 years. The cow-calf, stocker and grain operation thrives in western Nebraska near the Colorado border despite the arid climate and fragile sandy soil.

At any given point, 95% of the Wine Glass Ranch land is resting. This practice has increased plant diversity and the return of native grasses.

Jeff and Connie Pribbeno and their son and daughter-in-law, Logan and Brianna, own and operate Wine Glass Ranch near Imperial, Neb. The ranch is an example of how innovative agricultural practices can simultaneously improve ecological health, animal welfare and financial sustainability.

They let cattle do the work of harvesting. With limited water resources and challenging weather, it is even more important to protect and preserve the land growing the crops and feeding the cattle.

(NCBA Environmental Stewardship Award Program)

Ranch Transitions

Spanning generations, the ranch has transformed to a sophisticated business that challenges conventional ranching wisdom.

In 1888, Sherman McCoy, Logan’s great-great-grandfather, left Iowa by train and walked 30 miles from the westernmost stop in Elsie, Neb., to what is now the ranch. Once McCoy arrived at his destination, he filed for a homestead while Nebraska was still part of the frontier and established Lonestar Ranch.

Through good stewardship and thrifty living, the operation grew to almost 8,000 acres under his care. Following the McCoys, Lone Star Ranch was owned by their son-in-law and daughter, A.O. and Mary Stenger. The Stengers raised their only daughter, Babette, on the land, who registered the wine glass brand.

Babette and her husband, Bill Pribbeno, were the next generation to own the ranch. They passed it to their son and daughter-in-law, Jeff and Connie, who changed its name to Wine Glass Ranch to match the brand. In 2012, the fifth generation — Logan and Brianna — assumed management duties of the Wine Glass Ranch.

Read more about Logan and his philosophy managing Wine Glass Ranch:
I’m a Drover: An Innovator Redefining Ranching

(Photo: NCBA Environmental Stewardship Award Program)

For the first 100 years of the ranch, cattle were left to fend for themselves year-round on the native range, much like any other ranch or farm on the Great Plains. Cattle often traveled four to five miles between windmills to get a drink, and thus the areas around the mills were over grazed while other areas remained practically untouched.

The fourth generation became the first generation of conservationists. Jeff and Connie began the operation’s environmental stewardship journey in 1976 when Jeff pioneered no-till-eco-fallow in the area to add production by converting to three and four-year crop rotations and preventing wind erosion.

(Photo: NCBA Environmental Stewardship Award Program)

Cattle and Grazing

“We try to keep it pretty simple, and we try to make the cows survive on their own,” Jeff explains.

The Pribbeno family uses a 365-day grazing system without traditional hay feeding.

“We do not own a feed wagon and we do not feed any hay,” Logan explains.

Jeff devoted significant time, money and training to improving range management. This involved building extensive cross-fencing and adding multiple water sources, which allowed them to run more cattle on the same pasture while maintaining land health. The ranch’s management approach is hands-on, with daily monitoring of cattle and pastures throughout the entire year.

The cattle herd has been carefully developed, with Jeff’s breeding strategy to create “an easy keeping cow that can thrive in a non-selective, rotational grazing system.” This approach focuses on low-milk, low frame score cattle specifically adapted to their challenging environment.

One of the ranch’s most significant strategies is its extensive rotational grazing system. The Pribbeno family has installed “200 miles of fence, creating 90 paddocks.” Cattle typically stay in a 300-acre paddock for five to seven days, allowing for significant grass regeneration.

“I want that pasture to look like it looked 1,000 years ago before man showed up,” Jeff says.

ESAP Photography

(NCBA Environmental Stewardship Award Program)

Cover Crops

Cover crops play a crucial role in the ranch’s sustainability strategy. Logan describes their approach as unique, growing warm season mixes that can reach “14' tall and dense, like a jungle.”

They incorporate diverse crops like sorghum, pearl millet, brassicas and soybeans, then graze cattle through the field, leaving behind natural fertilization.

Logan explains he treats covers crops like a silage crop. He harvests approximately 25% of the crop’s weight and leaves remaining crop as natural fertilizer and ground cover.

The cover crop strategy reduces input costs, minimizes herbicide use and improves soil health.

This approach is displayed in innovative practices like precise input management. During a challenging year, he reduced nitrogen application on corn to just 20 lb., achieving remarkable yield efficiency.

“We need to cut inputs,” he explains. “There’s a fine line between deficient and efficient.”

(Wine Glass Ranch)

Wildlife Haven

The ranch has become a wildlife haven, with one survey documenting 80 bird species in just 48 hours. By creating prairie strips, protecting wetlands and implementing strategic habitat management, Logan says agricultural production and ecological preservation can coexist.

“We took the worst part of the farm and focused it on habitat,” he explains.

The ranch prioritizes habitat preservation, with Jeff planting more than 10,000 trees and shelter belts. They’ve created prairie strips around wetland areas and participate in state walk-in hunting programs.

Partnerships are crucial to the Pribbenos’ management model. Father and son both work closely with NRCS and FSA, viewing these relationships as strategic opportunities for innovation that have been crucial in implementing sustainable practices.

“Whenever we have something going on, we’ll call the NRCS office and say, ‘Hey, we’re thinking about this. How can you help?’” Logan explains.

Covers crops are treated like a silage crop at Wine Glass. They harvests approximately 25% of the crop’s weight and leave remaining crop as natural fertilizer and ground cover.

(Wine Glass Ranch)

Focus on Sustainability

By integrating advanced grazing techniques, strategic crop management and a long-term perspective, the Pribbenos are writing the next chapter in their family’s agricultural legacy.

“Sustainable means that if we can continue what we’re doing today, in 1,000 years, the land will look the same,” Jeff says.

Logan agrees, sharing his philosophy of leaving the land better for future generations and explaining “sustainability tends to be more profitable in the long run.”

Recognized for their focus on the environment and sustainability, the ranch was awarded the prestigious Nebraska Leopold Conservation Award in 2022. In 2025, the family was recognized as the 2025 region VII winner of the Environmental Stewardship Award Program (ESAP) .

“Wine Glass Ranch believes we cannot carry out our tradition of producing world-class beef without approaching sustainability with an open mind,” says Steve Hanson, owner of Hanson Family Farms & Sillassen Ranch. “The Pribbenos’ successful rotational grazing and no-till-eco-fallow practices prove our industry can uphold traditions while paving the way to an even stronger and more resilient future.”

Your Next Reads:
I’m a Drover: An Innovator Redefining Ranching
Sustainability Isn’t a Bad Word

What Does Tyson's Announcement Mean to Beef Producers?

Mon, 24 Nov 2025 23:32:27 GMT

Chaos in the cattle market continues as Tyson Foods announced on Friday its plan to end operations at its Lexington, Neb., beef facility and convert its Amarillo, Texas, beef facility to a single, full-capacity shift. The cattle complex was limit down Monday reacting to the announcement.

The Lexington plant employs nearly 3,200 people and can harvest 4,500 cattle a day, but has been running 3,600 to 3,700 according to John Nalivka of Sterling Marketing. It is one of 11 beef facilities in the company and one of the largest. The transition in Amarillo is expected to reduce daily harvest numbers from 5,500 to 2,700 to 2,800 and impact 1,700 workers. Tyson says the changes will go into effect on Jan. 20, 2026.

Jeff Stolle, Nebraska Cattlemen’s Association director of marketing, predicts the Lexington plant closure will reduce Nebraska cattle harvest capacity by 15%.

“The Tyson plant in Lexington has been a very valuable and consistent piece of our packer processor infrastructure in the state for up against 35 years now, and to lose this amount of harvest capacity on a daily basis is definitely going to be a challenge,” Stolle says.

The announcement is a shock as Stolle says there are significant feedyard expansion projects in the works, and he hopes there’s a future opportunity to bring the Lexington facility online with different ownership.

“Given the feeding infrastructure that is located near the Lexington plant, and the availability of high-quality feeder cattle and feedstuffs, we obviously hope there is some sort of path toward the plant continuing to operate as a harvest facility,” Stolle summarizes.

Don Close, Terrain senior animal protein analyst, explains the announcement comes following a rough year for the meatpacking industry and admits a plant closing has been a possibility for the last 18 months.

“Fed beef packers have been losing an average of $200 per head,” he says. “Those margins have certainly improved over the last two or three weeks, but it has been a tough year, and I don’t know that we’re near the end of this yet.”

Tyson’s announcement says it is shifting production to other plants to increase efficiency. But why close Lexington?

Elliott Dennis, University of Nebraska-Lincoln livestock and meat economist, predicts Tyson targeted its least efficient plant for closure to maximize profitability across its operations, highlighting the importance of operational efficiency in the beef industry.

Other analysts speculate competition from the new Sustainable Beef Plant in North Platte might have played a role.

According to Trey Wasserburger, Sustainable Beef is currently harvesting 1,100 head per day but plans to ramp up to 1,500 by Jan. 1.

Overcapacity Issue

Derrell Peel, Extension livestock marketing specialist from Oklahoma State University, says the Tyson announcement reduces capacity in the industry but does not solve the problem of overcapacity.

“This will reduce industry slaughter capacity by roughly 7,000 to 8,000 head per day,” he explains. “The exact impact will depend on forthcoming details, especially how Tyson will manage a one-shift plant. Depending on the details, the reduction represents roughly 7.5 to 9% of total industry slaughter capacity.”

Peel says Monday to Friday daily fed slaughter thus far in 2025 has averaged 90,529 head per day, down 3.6% from the recent peak (93,931 head per day) in 2022. However, Saturday slaughter has averaged 4,878 head this year, just 13.1% of the 37,137 head per day average in 2022.

For the first 45 weeks of the year, total weekly fed slaughter has averaged 457,524 head compared to 506,793 head per week in 2022, a decrease of 9.7%. The Tyson planned reduction in packing capacity might be nearly (but not quite) enough to balance the decrease in cattle slaughter since the peak in 2022. However, fed slaughter is expected to continue decreasing in 2026 and 2027.

“Excess packing capacity will continue to be an issue for beef packers for the foreseeable future,” Peel summarizes.

Short- and Long-Term Impacts of Lexington Plant Closure

Dennis says the Lexington plant closure will have immediate short-term effects on cattle prices. Drawing parallels to the 2019 Holcomb, Kan., plant fire, he predicts prices potentially falling and taking months to recover.

“Back in 2019, it took us about five to six weeks to find a bottom on the live cattle market,” Dennis says. “From the time we had that announcement of the fire, we ended up going about 12% down from where we were at pre-fire, and it took us almost three, three and a half months to get back to pre-fire prices.”

Dennis says the finished cattle will redistribute to other regional plants and the impact will be more about change in value proposition and logistics for producers than the ability to find a buyer.

Hyrum Egbert, meatpacking industry analyst, explains, “Tyson just changed the math on U.S. beef.”

He predicts the short-term impact will be:

Live cattle and feeders. Nearby futures and regional cash should soften, especially around Lexington/Amarillo as cattle lose a local bidder and get pushed farther to other plants. Expect weaker basis in those draw areas.
Beef cutout/wholesale. He says this is a rationing signal to beef buyers. Even if some volume is picked up elsewhere, the headline is tighter kill space which will lead to bullish cutout as buyers front-load coverage.
Packer margins. Less capacity chasing the same tight cattle supply will equate to better gross margins for packers.
Logistics and spreads Longer hauls for cattle will lead to higher freight, wider regional price dispersion and more noise in cash versus formula debates.

Long-term Egbert summarizes: “This isn’t a Saturday kill adjustment; it’s a permanent trim in hooks. Capacity is being pulled closer to the ‘new normal’ cattle supply, which reduces the odds of prolonged negative packer margins in the next phase of the cycle.”

Likewise, Dennis predicts long-term the closure will reduce cattle prices due to lower processing capacity and less competition. Yet despite disruptions, he says the fundamental demand for beef is historically high, driven by consumer preference and quality improvements, which should help support cattle prices in the long run.

“With tighter U.S. kill space on top of a small herd, imports — especially lean for grind — matter even more,” Egbert adds. “Tariffs, quotas and border policy will have an even stronger influence on spreads and retail prices. This is not likely going to be the last of plant closures. Regional plants are still extremely vulnerable and susceptible to closure.”

What’s Next for Producers and Packers

“I don’t think producers necessarily need to do anything different,” Peel says. “I still think there’s excess capacity in the industry, even with this downsizing, so there will be plenty of demand. I don’t think it changes anything. It doesn’t change the supply fundamentals at all.”

Close agrees with Egberts prediction that this might not be the last plant closure. He says Tyson’s announcement clears the path for other packers to follow suit.

“It’s not out of the realm of possibilities that we see another large plant or some of the smaller regional plants closed before we reach bottom in this cattle supply,” Close says.

Peel says with Tyson’s decision to reduce a shift and not close Amarillo is a positive.

“By only making a one shift adjustment in Amarillo, that tells me that decision was very much just directly a function of availability of cattle, but it also means they have the ability to go right back up to two shifts when the time gets right, as far as cattle availability,” Peel explains. “They just spent a lot of money in Amarillo remodeling and refurbishing that plant, so I don’t think they’re going to walk away from it completely, unless things continue to deteriorate for them in terms of their beef business.”

Dennis reminds producers the importance of managing price risk using available tools (like futures and options) because market volatility is unpredictable. He stresses risk management should be proactive, not reactive.

Close was a guest on AgriTalk Monday discussing the impact of the Tyson announcement as well as other beef industry economic factors today.

Your Next Read: CattleFax Predicts Profitability Despite Increased Uncertainty

CattleFax Predicts Profitability Despite Increased Uncertainty

Fri, 21 Nov 2025 20:15:24 GMT

The beef industry has experienced a year of “hybrid vigor” as cattle prices soared due to tight supplies and increasing consumer demand, summarizes CattleFax’s Kevin Good.

“The market has gotten a lot higher than any of us would have suggested as we started the year,” he says. “Now the market is anticipating some of those things that propelled the market to higher highs to come off. In other words, tariffs being reduced as well as the Mexican border reopening.”

Forecasting strong prices into 2026, the next market phase will be shaped by herd rebuilding and shifting global trade, Good adds. The volatility and political noise will continue, but the fundamentals will still matter.

(CattleFax)

Here are five key takeaways from Good’s presentation at the recent Kansas Livestock Association Convention:

1. The markets are experiencing significant volatility, largely influenced by noise in the media, tariffs and the Mexican border closure.

Good says regional market dynamics spotlight Kansas and the Midwest as more advantaged relative to Texas, for example, which faces tighter supplies and higher costs until the Mexican border reopens.

Market volatility is strongly influenced by psychology and external policy issues.

“Psychology can take the markets higher than they should otherwise, and they can take them lower than they should otherwise,” he explains.

2. The dairy industry’s role in the beef supply is growing.

“We are getting more beef out of the dairy industry than we ever have in the past,” Good says.

This is the largest dairy herd in about 25 years.
A bigger percentage of the dairy producers’ income is derived from beef — salvage cow value or day-old beef-on-dairy calves.
In 2025, 18% of the cattle harvested will be dairy or beef-on-dairy cross.
Slower culling: Dairy producers have transitioned from culling cows after their third lactation to their fourth lactation.
The export portion of dairy revenue has tripled in the last 25 years.

(CattleFax)

3. Strong consumer demand continues, but high prices pose risks.

Beef demand and evolving consumer preferences are shaping industry profitability. Consumer demand for high-quality protein remains strong, but there is concern about potential pushback if prices stay high. Good predicts retail prices may soften somewhat next year, but market fundamentals are still solid.

“If we just continue to focus on what’s paid us over the last 25 years as beef demand has improved — quality and consistency — it is as simple as that,” he says.

(CattleFax)

4. Future expansion remains tentative, hinging on weather and profitability.

“We liquidated for about six years, probably one to two years longer than the economics suggested because of drought,” Good says.

The outlook projects continued tight supply for the first half of next year and possibly lower prices in the second half, with gradual expansion expected to follow depending on weather and economic conditions.

5. The overall market outlook is healthy but shifting.

Good says packing capacity continues to favor cattle feeders for now, but labor challenges and changing market cycles could impact this leverage in the coming years.

“Big picture … we’re suggesting we’ve seen our cycle high. The trends changed. Fundamentals are still solid. Beef demand is great,” Good says.

“Generally speaking, I would say [there’s a] positive outlook looking at prices,” he says. “If we make the assumption the border reopens in the first half of next year, and at the same time tariffs are more normalized … average prices for next year will be a little bit lower. [2026] will be a tale of two halves — the first half will resemble the second half of this year and then you’ve got more risk as you go through the second half of next year.”

Good is optimistic for continued profitability for the cow-calf producer in 2026.

“Just think about the dollars in the system,” Good summarizes. “Our prices have gone up at least 2% on an annual basis, faster than inflation, for 25 years. Those are real dollars — real dollars that are now landing in your pocket no matter what segment of the business you’re in.”

Your next read: What Does Talk of $10 Ground Beef Mean to Producers?

What Does Talk of $10 Ground Beef Mean to Producers?

Wed, 19 Nov 2025 20:00:36 GMT

While the core fundamentals of the beef industry remain unchanged, the overall environment has become much more volatile and uncertain in recent weeks.

Omaha Steaks CEO Nate Rempe, in a recent interview on Fox Business’ Mornings with Maria , predicts ground beef prices will reach $10 per pound by the third quarter of 2026.

In response to that prediction, ag economist Glynn Tonsor from Kansas State University reports, according to September Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the national average price for ground beef was $6.32 per pound. He explains while niche markets such as Omaha Steaks could see some products priced at $10, the national average is unlikely to reach that level within the next three years.

Tonsor emphasizes Omaha Steaks serves a distinct customer base, and their prices should not be generalized to represent all U.S. ground beef prices.

Lance Zimmerman, senior animal protein analyst with Rabo AgriFinance, adds: “It’s possible, but that’d be pretty wild. Is it probable? I would say no, based on history.”

He explains his stance also referring to the BLS historic data, although prices spiked radically during the pandemic posting the highest year-over-year increases on record, that event only resulted in a 34% jump, far short of the 54% increase needed to see $10 ground beef by the third quarter of 2026.

What Does All This Beef Chatter Cause?

The beef industry has found itself in national headlines since Sept. 15. The industry has been experiencing chaos in the markets since President Donald Trump made statements regarding the need to lower beef prices as well as his request for the Department of Justice to investigate meatpackers for driving up the price of beef.

“The base fundamentals of the industry have not changed in the last four weeks,” Tonsor says. “The volatility, the noise in the business environment, has definitely elevated.”

Read more about the industry chaos today:
Beef Industry Chaos: Tight Supplies, Strong Consumer Demand and Political Interference

Zimmerman explains while political sound bites and promises to lower food prices draw media attention, they do not directly affect the day-to-day decisions by producers who remain focused on long-term business fundamentals.

“At the end of the day, the average cow-calf producer, stocker operator and feedlot operator, have a business to run, and all of this noise doesn’t change much surrounding their day-to-day business,” Zimmerman summarizes. “The challenge is the president is making this a very regular soundbite, as is the rest of his administration. And, cyclically, there is no quick fix.”

Zimmerman shares his frustration regarding the broader impact of political statements, especially presidential promises to bring down food prices. He explains that, historically, the only way to significantly reduce food costs is to enter a recession. The catch, he argues, is that neither administration nor producers desire such an outcome. This underscores the conflict between policy rhetoric and on-the-ground market drivers.

Tonsor adds media attention and dramatic statements, such as $10 ground beef, often do not accurately represent broad market reality.

“I’m trying to use this as an excuse to educate on why prices are higher; [it’s] not just because cow numbers are down,” Tonsor explains. “When we just jump to the number of cows, we don’t give credit to the demand story that the public wants beef.”

Read more about beef demand:
Consumers Confirm Protein is In: Meat Continues to Have Its Moment on the Plate
How Many Minutes Does a Consumer Have to Work to Buy A Pound of Ground Beef?

One question on the mind of producers and industry stakeholders is if the political and media attention will heighten consumer awareness to beef prices and cause a change in buying behavior.

Tonsor says, so far, there is little impact from these headlines on consumer demand.

“It’s too early to tell if there’s been a consumer demand impact from all the chatter,” he says. “My best guess is little-to-no direct impact.”

Both analysts agree beef prices are fueled by demand. Tonsor notes consumers are willing to pay the retail price of beef today because of their continued demand for taste and protein. He points out if public demand for beef stays strong, prices will remain robust.

“The public still thinks taste is the most important thing when they make a decision,” he summarizes.

Slowing Down Rebuilding

“This uncertainty has wrecked the market potential in Chicago in the short run,” Zimmerman explains. “But the timing of it also couldn’t be worse for the cow-calf producer who’s making those fall retention decisions right now.”

Both analysts agree the heightened uncertainty is making producers more hesitant to invest or expand their herds, which will lead to slower industry investment and herd growth.

Read more about herd rebuilding:
Rebuilding the U.S. Cow Herd: A Calculated Climb

“I think we’re going to slow investment compared to even a month ago, just because those that are anxious or don’t like uncertainty are a little more cautious today than they were a month ago,” Tonsor explains. “Those that are extra uncomfortable with elevated uncertainty, like not knowing what the trade environment might be, it’s going to give them pause. So, they will be less likely to hold back a heifer and expand. They’ll be less likely to modernize the feedyard. They’ll be less likely to do whatever that capital investment was.”

Will Tarriff Reduction Impact Prices?

Late last week, Trump signed an executive order that modifies the scope of the reciprocal tariffs he first announced on April 2. The executive order now exempts several agricultural products from tariffs, including beef.

Zimmerman explains Brazil’s beef processors and beef exporters would have gained the most if the country’s additional tariffs were removed by the U.S. The previous rate was an additional 50% tariff on top of the 26.4% tariff that exists on all imports from countries without a free-trade agreement on beef after the first 65,005 MT each calendar year. However, the Brazil tariffs are structured under two separate practices. Ten percent are reciprocal tariffs, and the additional 40% that came in August are through another process.

“The latest removal of reciprocal tariffs on beef effectively changes Brazil’s country-specific import tax from 50% to 40%,” he explains. “This is not going to significantly change the competitive landscape for global exporters shipping into the U.S. market. It is still incredibly tough for Brazil to compete with Australia, New Zealand and other major lean beef importers in the U.S. market.”

Tonsor adds reducing tariffs could marginally lower beef prices for consumers, but the effect would not be dramatic. He points out the U.S. produces the majority of its own beef (more than 80%), so changes in import tariffs have a limited impact on domestic prices.

He says recent record import months only moved the import share from around 15% to slightly more than 20%. Tonsor expects the net effect of the tariff reduction on beef prices to be fairly small, potentially less than a 5%-to-10% change, and that overall, strong domestic demand will continue to be the main driver of prices.

Challenge to Producers

Tonsor says his advice to producers is to steady the ship.

He encourages a steady approach, suggesting those comfortable with uncertainty should move forward as planned, while others might pause on major decisions. Ultimately, he expects less herd expansion and more caution among producers, even as demand fundamentals continue to provide underlying strength for the industry.

Tonsor says while general industry investment and expansion might slow, producers who move forward despite the uncertainty could be rewarded, especially if fewer others do the same. His overall message is for producers to carefully weigh their risk tolerance and business needs before making significant changes and not to let the current noise distract from their long-term goals.

Despite recent market corrections, Zimmerman says strong demand and cyclical tightness mean profitability remains high for most producers. He shares these six strategies for producers to consider looking forward:

Consider Strategic Heifer Retention. He advises producers to begin or continue retaining heifers, even if only enough to replace natural attrition in the cow herd, as a step toward gradual herd rebuilding in tight supply conditions.
Use Price Protection Tools. He emphasizes the importance of locking in profit floors using risk management tools such as Livestock Risk Protection (LRP) insurance , futures or options contracts, encouraging producers not to wait for the highest prices but to protect profitability when opportunities arise.
Maintain Long-Term Perspective. Despite recent market corrections, he urges producers to keep a long-term view; demand is strong, and rebuilding will be slow, so planning for sustained higher prices is key.
Stay Vigilant and Informed. He recommends producers remain watchful for profit opportunities in the market, be proactive in their strategic decisions and stay informed about both market trends and policy changes.
Be Cautious, Not Reactionary. He suggests not overreacting to political headlines or media narratives, emphasizing that day-to-day operational fundamentals should guide decisions rather than short-term noise.
Prepare for Continued Volatility. He encourages resilience and adaptation strategies as the industry faces persistent uncertainty from trade policy and disease threats such as New World screwworm .

Your Next Read: Did the Administration’s Plan to Lower Beef Prices Wreck the Bull Run in the Cattle Market?

Normal La Niña Pattern to Return By Thanksgiving

Tue, 18 Nov 2025 21:47:22 GMT

What are the primary weather events being watched by the leading ag meteorologists right now? Here’s a round-up.

A Bit of an Oddball La Niña

“We need to be really careful about making big assumptions about this La Niña. It is not a classic La Niña,” says Drew Lerner, World Weather, Inc. He points to two large rain events in the southern U.S. Plains this past week.

USDA meteorologist Brad Rippey adds southern California has also received a lot of precipitation. He says it’s the timing and strength of the La Niña bringing a different pattern than could be expected.

“The big thing we’re watching is the fact that we’re in a La Niña during the month of September for the fifth time in six years,” Rippey says. “And with that, November’s been a little bit strange so far. We haven’t fully kicked into what you would expect to see with a La Niña regime.”

More Precipitation on Its Way

“We also have a lot of warm ocean water between Hawaii and California, so watch for more heavy rain, like we saw this week coming into California a little later in the winter,” Lerner says.

Rippey says people across the Great Plains can expect more storms through this week.

“Given the fact that we are heading into a La Niña winter, we need the moisture across the southern Plains now,” Rippey says. “It looks like more of a La Niña regime setting in for the latter part of November and certainly by Thanksgiving. By that I mean stormier, colder weather across the north, and some of that warm and dry weather should become more established across the South. It’ll be a while until we get there.”

The week of Thanksgiving is showing some increased chance for winter storms and perhaps travel-impactful weather events.

Droughty Conditions Bring Concerns

Dry weather persists in key grazing areas, which Matt Makens from Makens Weather says is his biggest concern for the rest of this year and early into 2026.

Lerner adds: “The northern Plains and neighboring areas of Canada’s prairies won’t see much precipitation. There’s still a big, bad drought up there, and they’re hoping for better moisture. But in the meantime, our wheat that’s in the soft wheat that’s in the lower Midwest bowl will get a nice drink of water.”

Pacific Storm Season Brought More Action Than the Atlantic

Reflecting on the ongoing hurricane season, Rippey says while it was indicated we could have an active season, there have been only 13 named storms and only five hurricanes.

Without any major storms making landfall in the U.S., Rippey points to a few factors:

“We had the African feeder storms, the thunderstorms that come off the African coast, came off a little further north than they normally would. And that put some of those thunderstorm complexes into a more hostile environment as they developed or tried to develop,” he says.
“We had a protective jet stream across the eastern United States, a little dip along the East Coast of the United States that really forced any developing storms to recurve before they ever reach the United States,” he says.

“A lot of that moisture ended up in the western United States eventually, remnant tropical moisture, and that certainly has helped to chip away at the drought across the western United States, courtesy of the active eastern Pacific season with 18 overall named storms,” Rippey adds.

Planting Season Outlook

While planting season is about five months away for many, the weather trends are tipping the scales to a slow start.

“I still have some confidence in saying that some of the northern areas of the country — northern plains, upper Midwest — could face a spring with a delayed warm-up,” Rippey says. “We could see some snowy cold conditions lingering into the early to mid-spring across some of those northern production areas. Typically coming out of La Niña, we do see a later planting season in the north, and we will have to watch drought in the south.”

La Niña Will Flip to El Niño

As for what’s ahead in the new year, Maken says while we might start with a La Niña, toward the end of the year, we’ll flip into an El Niño.

“And when you do this flip, it depends on how quickly it flips, because it can mean a lot of rainfall for a lot of folks,” he says. “And not that La Niña and El Niño are the end-all, be-alls, but they’re the major players in the room. Some really like hearing El Niño. Others really do not like the person saying that.”

Did the Administration's Plan to Lower Beef Prices Wreck the Bull Run in the Cattle Market?

Fri, 14 Nov 2025 20:54:30 GMT

2025 has been a historic year in the cattle market. The tightest cattle numbers in 70 years laid the ground work for cash and futures prices to push to record and all-time highs.

From All-Time High to Crash
The peak in the cattle futures market was hit on Oct. 16. However, by Nov. 6, live cattle saw a $30 correction from the highs and feeder cattle futures set back nearly $70. The cattle market chaos wasn’t tied to fundamentals but liquidation by speculative traders on fear of policy changes by the administration as President Donald Trump announced a plan to lower beef prices for consumers.

Fundamentals Have Not Changed
Don Close, senior animal protein analyst with Terrain, says the market fundamentals that started the bull run in the cattle market are still intact.

“Certainly with domestic supplies, they have not changed in any fashion when you’re looking at the tightest cattle numbers that we’ve had in 70 years,” he says.

With high retail beef prices, there is no evidence of consumer sticker shock or trading down to other lower-priced proteins. Close says the beef industry has not seen any erosion in demand.

So, what changed? Analysts say it was the shift in market psychology in reaction to President Trump’s announced plan to lower beef prices for consumers on Oct. 16.

While the President’s announcement lacked details, the goal seemed to be to mimic the success the administration had in bringing down egg prices. With the prospect of government intervention, the live and feeder cattle futures touched limit down the following day as speculative traders who had been long in the cattle futures market for many weeks took profits and liquidated.

Jeff Hoogendoorn, with Professional Ag Marketing, says the managed money fund traders did not want to bet against the government.

“If you’re a hedge fund manager, you look at this cattle thing and say ‘Yeah it’s gone up an awful lot. We’ve made a lot of money,’” he says. “‘Now the administration’s going to be fighting against me. I think I’ll go find something else to do’, and you move your money elsewhere.”

Trump Administration Quadruples Argentina Beef Imports
Just days later, President Trump made an announcement to quadruple the Tariff Rate Quota for Argentina beef imports . That triggered additional selling in cattle futures despite the insignificant impact it has on U.S. beef supplies.

Patrick Linnell, director of market research with CattleFax, explains: “That change from 20,000 metric tons to 80,000 metric tons would represent around 132 million lb. And really, that comes down to about three-tenths of a lb. per capita to net beef supplies.”

(Allendale )

The move drew immediate fire from the nation’s cattle groups, including the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA).

Colin Woodall, NCBA chief executive officer, explains that with the current trade imbalance with Argentina, the administration needed to push for more market access in Argentina instead of importing more of its beef.

“Over the past five years, Argentina has sent over $800 million worth of their beef into the U.S. market, and they’ve only accepted $7 million of our beef into their market,” Woodall explains.

Justin Tupper president of the U.S. Cattlemen’s Association, adds that increasing beef imports was a slap in the face to U.S. cattle producers, and they opposed the move because countries like Brazil and Argentina have lower food safety standards and other practices that put the U.S. at a disadvantage.

“I think we want to be able to play on the same level playing field,” he says. “And I don’t think that happens with Argentina and Brazil. And again, I really don’t think it’s going to lower prices.”

Tupper adds neither producers or consumers stood to gain from increasing beef imports.

For more about Tupper’s thoughts:
South Dakota Producer Speaks Out About Beef Imports and “Product of USA” Push

Cattle Groups Tell Trump to Stay out of the Cattle Business
As a result, cattle groups and outraged producers warned the president to stay out of their business.

Woodall says: “We have worked really hard through the free market to be able to achieve the prices that we’re seeing. We don’t want government intervention coming in and messing with that and taking away these great opportunities we’re seeing.”

Tupper agrees: “It’s an industry that wants to work on competition and merit based, and we can do that if we make sure we don’t get to many outside interests — the government being one.”

Government Policy Pushes Prices Higher
However, two government policies pushed live cattle from $210 to $250 from July through September.

1. Increased Tariffs on Brazil. The U.S. increased tariffs on Brazil an additional 50% in mid-August, which nearly halted imports of beef trim coming into the U.S. Linnell explains, prior to that time, Brazil was a top importer of trim used to blend in ground beef.

“As of July on a 12-month basis, we’d imported just shy of 1.1 billion lb. from Brazil,” he says.

2. Closing the Mexican Border. The biggest policy change that tightened cattle numbers came from the U.S. closing the border to feeder cattle imports . Linnell says prior to closure, the U.S. imported more than 1.2 million feeder cattle annually. So, dropping the ban would have an immediate supply shock.

“We won’t see all 1.2 million head coming across at once but approaching that 25,000 head a week isn’t out of the question,” he adds.

(CattleFax )

While USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins has confirmed there’s no date for resuming trade, speculative traders are headline driven. Every time USDA hosts a news conference on New World screwworm, it tanks the market — especially feeder cattle futures.

The market has also been sensitive to rumors of the border reopening, says Scott Varilek, of Kooima Kooima Varilek.

“There’s this large supply in Mexico. That would be the one thing that would probably affect this market the most,” Varilek says. “So, we’re penciling that in.”

Trump Calls for DOJ Investigation
The latest attempt to curb beef inflation came Nov. 7, as the president announced on his Truth Social site the Department of Justice was launching an investigation of the nation’s meat packers .

The president’s announcement says he vows to “ensure these corporations aren’t criminally profiting at the expense of the American people.”

Packer concentration has long been a hot button issue for cattle producers and is at the root of R-CALF’s six-year lawsuit, explains Bill Bullard, chief executive officer.

“We have alleged that the meat packers had unlawfully colluded in order to artificially depress cattle prices, while at the same time raising or inflating the price of beef to the consumers,” he says.

Currently 85% of the U.S. beef packing industry is owned by four entities, and Bullard says this monopoly violates antitrust law.

“Both the producers on the beginning of the supply chain and consumers at the end of the supply chain were exploited as a result of this monopolistic marketing structure,” he says.

Read more about Bullard’s thoughts regarding the DOJ investigation: Is the Beef Market Broken? One Cattleman Says Yes

But according to Derrell Peel, livestock marketing specialist at Oklahoma State University, past DOJ price fixing probes and research have disputed that.

“While there’s a very small level of negative price impact due to the concentration of market power, if you will, it’s far outweighed by the by the benefits in terms of cost efficiencies that the large firms bring to the industry,” he summarizes.

Read more about Peel’s comments regarding the industry chaos today: Beef Industry Chaos: Tight Supplies, Strong Consumer Demand and Political Interference

Cattle Producers Say Trump’s Beef Plan Topped the Market
Some of the other aspects of the President’s plan to rebuild the cattle herd were met with favor, such as opening more public land to grazing. However, in the end, the president’s beef plan has wreaked havoc in the cattle market and outraged producers, according to Varilek.

“They’re mad,” he summarizes. “That’s all it took was just kind of the government shoving in there and wrecking [the] market. I think the biggest thing was that there were some claims that the tariffs were the reason that we got this high, and that is not at all the case.”

Linnell agrees the negative headlines have hurt the market, adding: “There is no doubt that these policy decisions are making a big impact on the marketplace. They also just increase a lot of uncertainty and volatility in the industry.”

Cattle Market Chaos Further Slows Herd Rebuilding
The loss in value of females just over the last three weeks has also hurt producer confidence, and according to Close, that could further slow heifer retention and herd rebuilding efforts .

“We’re seeing one more round where we’re going to kick that can down the road instead of actually retaining the females needed,” he explains.

Market analysts, including Peel, say the reality is lowering beef prices is like turning the Titanic — and the president’s plan is unlikely to affect much change.

“It took several years of of drought and other impacts to get us here,” Peel explains. “It’s going to take several years for us to grow our way out of this situation.”

Close says once the market refocuses on fundamentals, cattle could retest the highs.

“As crazy as it sounds today, I’m not yet convinced we’ve seen the high of the cash market, and I would readily argue that we get into next spring, next summer to see a cash market back in that $240 to $245 plus level. I think is entirely possible,” he predicts.

Beef Industry Chaos: Tight Supplies, Strong Consumer Demand and Political Interference

Wed, 12 Nov 2025 20:04:16 GMT

The current state of the cattle market and beef industry has been described as chaotic. “There’s chaos in cattle,” as Chip Flory, AgriTalk host, put it.

The industry turmoil follows recent statements made by President Donald Trump regarding the need to lower beef prices as well as his request for the Department of Justice to immediately begin an investigation into meatpackers for driving up the price of beef.

Derrell Peel, Extension livestock marketing specialist from Oklahoma State University, affirms these are unique times, emphasizing while political factors have always indirectly influenced agriculture, it’s unprecedented for the cattle and beef markets to be at the center of direct political debate.

On a recent AgriTalk segment, Peel points out the inherent biological and production constraints of the cattle industry — particularly the fixed timeline to raise cattle — make quick fixes impossible. Both Flory and Peel stress that no political policy can shorten the cattle production process; any effective supply response requires patience and long-term adjustment.

Packers Under Fire

The concept of industry consolidation and foreign packer ownership has long drawn scrutiny with frequent government investigations. Peel says highly concentrated industries such as beef packing have been targets for skepticism and regulatory attention for over a century, to the point suspicion of packers is almost “a cultural thing” within segments of the industry.

He characterizes the latest call as another attempt to target convenient scapegoats rather than addressing deeper systemic realities of supply and demand.

“The reason we have the industry structure we do is because the economies of size and cost efficiencies are such a powerful economic force,” Peels explains.

He confirms researchers have long studied market power, and while concentration does have a small negative price impact for producers, the efficiency and cost-savings from large-scale firms more than compensate. These benefits, he says, keep cattle prices higher for producers and beef prices lower for consumers than they would be with a less efficient structure.

Dissecting the economics of margin markets Peels explains why price changes in different parts of the beef supply chain — cow-calf, feeders, packers and retailers — don’t move in lockstep. He uses a “bungee cord” analogy to illustrate the complex, dynamic and time-lagged interactions linking cattle prices at the farm with retail beef prices.

“All cattle prices and beef prices are ultimately connected, but they’re not connected with a stick or a chain,” Peel summarizes.” They’re connected with a bungee cord. There’s just an enormous amount of dynamics in this thing.”

Regarding the foreign ownership debate, Peel says there is no evidence foreign ownership alters packer behavior within the U.S. marketplace. He emphasizes foreign firms have made large investments in U.S. facilities and continue to operate them by the same market logic that would govern domestic ownership.

He also points out it is unclear who else would be in a position to make such significant investments if these foreign companies were not involved. This pragmatic view suggests the ownership issue might be less important than is commonly believed, at least concerning everyday operations and market outcomes.

A Lot Hinges on Rebuilding the Cow Herd

In his latest article, “ All Bets are Off ,” Peel says: “The latest edition in the torrent of recent political attentions directed at the cattle and beef industry includes allegations of market manipulation against the beef packing industry. Beef packers are the one segment that has been most negatively impacted in the current market, incurring huge losses due to poor margins and limited cattle supplies.”

(Meat Institute)

Peel reports packers have been losing enormous amounts of money for about the past 18 to 24 months. According to the Meat Institute, packer margins slipped into the red in September 2024. Through the week ending Oct. 4, 2025, packer margins were a negative $126.50 per head, up slightly from a year earlier at a negative $125.65 per head, according to Sterling Profit Tracker. The outlook for the year is a negative $165.96 per head packer margin.

“There’s just simply not enough cattle for them to operate at cost efficient capacities,” Peel explains.

This negative trend was anticipated — the reduced supply of cattle has made it difficult for packing plants to function at cost-efficient capacities, leading to the accumulation of operating losses. Peel points out the combination of low unit margins and insufficient cattle supplies challenges the economic viability of packers, further illustrating the complexity of the current environment.

This decline in inventory is not the result of a single factor but is driven by several years of drought and other market pressures. It is clear high beef and cattle prices are a result of these tight supplies and, according to Peel, these high prices are likely to persist for several years. The industry simply cannot turn around production levels quickly, and it will take time — a matter of years, not months — for conditions to normalize.

“Using logic that only works in the office of a politician, packers are supposedly wielding unacceptable market power while paying record high cattle prices and artificially raising beef prices … but not enough to avoid losing a couple hundred dollars on every animal they process — certainly many millions of dollars,” Peel says. “If beef packers had any significant ability to exercise market power, I am certain that we would not have record high cattle prices and packers would not be losing money.”

Peel suggests the federal government attacks on beef packers are aided and supported by a vocal minority of the cattle industry and a few sympathetic politicians who view packers as a perennial villain and always worthy of attack anytime the opportunity is presented.

“The timing of such attacks this time is particularly puzzling as dismantling the packing industry would certainly jeopardize current record high cattle prices and the best economic returns most producers have ever enjoyed,” Peels says. “I guess some cowboys just can’t stand prosperity.”

R-CALF CEO Bill Bullard says the cattle market is fundamentally broken citing years of an inverse relationship between falling cattle prices and increasing retail beef prices when the only ingredient in beef is cattle. Read more about his perspective.

Patience not Politics

Beef and cattle prices, Peel notes, are historically high, a result of industry-wide low cattle inventory. Rebuilding the nation’s cow herd will be a long, slow process, keeping prices elevated for an extended period. And Peel says there is no definitive evidence producers are saving heifers to start the rebuilding process.

“2025 may prove to be technically the cyclical low, but 2026 is going to be barely bigger, if it is, and no growth in 2026 and probably none in 2027 ... it’s 2028 into 2029 before that turns into increased beef production,” Peel predicts.

He summarizes neither regulatory nor political action will can speed up the rebuilding process. It will take years of concerted effort, market healing and stability before the industry can expect a meaningful rebound in herd numbers and production — a reality that requires patience across the industry.

“There is absolutely nothing anybody can do to make beef prices go down, or cattle prices, other than maybe tear up the industry completely,” Peels says. “And if we tear up the industry, it’ll make cattle prices go down, but it won’t make beef prices go down. It’ll make beef prices go even higher for consumers and the only way to fix this is to give the industry time to rebuild, and that’s going to take two to four years if we ever get started.”

He says a majority of cattle producers understand the beef industry is extremely complex and all segments are critical and essential.

“Though the outcome of current political actions is uncertain, the potential for long-term harm to the industry is substantial,” Peel says. “Anytime politics trumps economics, the strong supply and demand fundamentals that have determined the outlook for the industry to this point become irrelevant. Expectations for prices and production going forward are now completely clouded…therefore… all bets are off.”

Your Next Read: You Be The Judge: The Big Bad Beef Packers Are On Trial

Unpacking the Beef: Report Clarifies Cattle Market Realities, Packer Challenges & Trade Tensions

Fri, 31 Oct 2025 20:17:59 GMT

Since President Donald Trump’s comments last week, a lot has been discussed on social media and at the coffee shop about increasing beef imports from Argentina, beef retail prices, the cattle market and beef processing concentration.

“It is complicated,” the Meat Institute posted on LinkedIn regarding the current state of the beef industry and the dialog about beef prices. In response, the Meat Institute released a nine-page document — The Reality of Beef and Cattle Markets — addressing import trends, market conditions, industry concentration, ground beef production, policy proposals and international trade challenges.

Key discussion points include:

1. Argentine Beef Imports

The report summarizes increasing beef imports from Argentina is unlikely to significantly lower ground beef prices in the U.S. If Argentina fills the proposed 80,000 metric ton quota, it will only increase its share of U.S. beef imports from 2% to 5%, which is unlikely to significantly impact retail or restaurant beef prices.

Argentina primarily exports grass-fed frozen lean trim for ground beef production, with limited impact on overall U.S. beef imports. In 2024, Argentina was the eighth-largest beef supplier to the U.S., exporting 32,798 metric tons, while the U.S. imported 1.56 million metric tons overall.

2. Beef and Cattle Market Conditions

The report summarizes current market conditions with these six statements:

Cattle producers are enjoying record prices, while beef packers are suffering under negative margins.
The shortage of market-ready cattle continues, adding further pressure to packers’ margins, which first dropped to negative values in September 2024.
Packing plant utilization rates have dipped, and some facilities are scaling back operations, including reduced shifts and shortened workweeks. Uncertain immigration policy moving forward can have an impact here as well.
Trade policy uncertainty from proposed tariffs adds to the cost pressures on the cattle market.
Additionally, foreign animal disease import restrictions — particularly on Mexican feeder cattle — are another contributing factor to increasing costs.
Consumer demand has remained resilient with improved beef quality. However, prospects for elevated cattle prices and the beef those cattle yield remain directly tied to the extent end-user consumer demand can remain robust.

“Cattle prices were at record levels for most of 2023, surpassing the 2014-2015 previous record highs as the cattle herd rebuilt from the previous low points of the cattle cycle,” the report says. “Through 2024, prices continued at new record levels and increased further into 2025, exceeding an average of $242 cwt. in August, the highest nominal price on record.

“Cash prices have declined to $232 cwt. in the first two weeks of October, but futures contracts are at record levels, even after adjusted for inflation. The previous highs in October 2015 would be $222 cwt. in today’s dollars, a full $10 cwt. below the current prices as of Oct. 14.”

The report goes on to say: “This has put U.S. beef packers under financial pressure. Packer margins slipped into the red in September 2024. Through the week ending Oct. 4, 2025, packer margins were a negative $126.50 per head, up slightly from a year earlier at a negative $125.65 per head, according to Sterling Profit Tracker. The outlook for the year is a packer margin of negative $165.96 per head.”

(Meat Institute)

For 2025, cow-calf producer margins are estimated to be up 122.3% from 2024 and 180.67% from 2023 to $900 per head. Feedlot margins are estimated to be up 351% from 2024 to $514.33 per head. But packer margins have declined 120% from already negative margins in 2024 and are estimated to be down 269% from 2023.

“With fewer market-ready cattle available, plant utilization rates have dipped and some facilities are scaling back operations, including reduced shifts and shortened workweeks. Packing plants were operating at 77% capacity for the week of Oct. 4, down from 85% a year ago. Uncertain immigration policy moving forward can have an impact here as well,” the report summarizes.

(Meat Institute)

The share of the retail beef dollar also indicates producers have been faring well. The producers’ share of the retail beef dollar was 55% in August 2025 and has averaged 54% so far in 2025. The packers’ share has dropped from 13% to 5%, reflecting the negative packer margins.

Download the Meat Institute’s full Cattle and Beef Market Update .

3. Concentration in the Beef Packing Sector

“The U.S. meat packing sector is a dynamic, resilient and highly competitive industry with a long history of providing an abundant supply of high quality, safe and affordable products to American consumers and serving as a vital economic engine that supports America’s farmers and ranchers,” the report says.

(Meat Institute)

The top four beef packers in the U.S. account for the purchase and slaughter of about 81% of all fed cattle in the U.S., according to the most recent report from the USDA’s Packers and Stockyards Division. But those fed cattle make up only about 78% of the Federally Inspected cattle slaughtered in the U.S. The other 22% is made up of cows, both dairy and beef and some bulls.

“Much of the rhetoric about beef industry concentration implies that consolidation in the beef packing sector is ongoing and that market power is becoming increasingly concentrated. That is not the case,” the report says. “The four-firm concentration ratio in the beef cattle industry has not changed appreciably over the past 30 years. According to USDA, in 1994, for example, that ratio was 82%, compared with 81% today.”

4. Ground Beef

Ground beef accounts for approximately 50% of U.S. beef consumption. Imported lean trim complements U.S. beef production from cull cows, helping maintain affordability without directly competing with domestic beef.

“Without imported lean trim, more highly marbled quality U.S. beef would be used, and ground beef would be more expensive,” the report explains.

5. Policy Issues

Despite record cattle prices and the smallest cattle herd in 75 years, there are increasing calls for mandatory country-of-origin (COOL) labeling for beef.

“The mandatory COOL experiment was implemented and it failed,” the report says. “From 2002 through Congress repealing the law in 2015, we learned that mandatory COOL adds massive compliance costs — the industry incurred implementation costs of approximately $1.5 billion, plus $200 million in additional annual compliance costs thereafter — yet by USDA’s own analysis, it did not increase consumer demand. Mandatory COOL simply adds cost, not value.”

On Jan. 1, 2026, USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service will begin implementing its voluntary COOL rule.

“Let the rule and the free market work: if consumers demand ‘Product of the U.S.’ labels on their meat, then processors can and will provide it,” the report says.

For more info, download the Meat Institute’s mCOOL paper .

The reports also explains proposals like the PRIME Act and interstate shipment of state-inspected meat are seen as threats to food safety and international trade relationships.

“The concept in the PRIME Act is even worse,” the report explains. “Under Rep. Thomas Massie’s legislation, custom exempt meat establishments would be allowed to slaughter animals, process the meat and sell it directly to consumers or to restaurants, hotels or grocery stores within the state, without any inspection. It is a recipe for foodborne illnesses, and consumers in restaurants and hotels would have no idea they would be eating uninspected meat (and grocery store consumers would only know if they look for and can’t find the USDA inspection symbol). Food safety should be the top priority, not something legislated away.”

6. China Beef Exports

The Meat Institute urges action as China blocks more than 415 U.S. beef facilities from exporting.

“In 2024, China was the U.S.’s third largest market, by value, for beef, at over $1.5 billion,” the paper summarizes. “The strong beef exports to China were thanks to President Trump’s leadership in securing the U.S.-China Phase One Agreement during his first term. However, since the beginning of 2025 — and in contravention of the terms of the Phase One Agreement — China has failed to renew the registrations for more than 415 U.S. beef establishments, making them ineligible to export to China. This is a massive market loss for the U.S. that Brazil and other countries have been eager to fill.”

$4 Feeder Cattle: Dream or Reality?

Mon, 27 Oct 2025 19:37:12 GMT

As October draws to a close, U.S. officials are reportedly going to meet with Mexican counterparts this week to talk about reopening the border . The possibility of trade resuming, coupled with President Donald Trump’s comments on lowering beef prices and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins’ announcement to “fortify the beef industry,” sent the cattle market spiraling in recent days.

Despite the downturn, the fundamentals haven’t changed: reduced supply and strong consumer demand are fueling record-high market prices.

“The reduction in available supply and robust beef demand to-date has clearly provided price support,” says Glynn Tonsor, Kansas State University professor of agricultural economics. “Tied to that is the biggest risk in my opinion — beef demand. Anything that erodes beef demand strength, most likely macroeconomic and consumer income in nature in my opinion, will put downward pressure on cattle of all weight classes.”

Tonsor says he never gave $4 much thought until the past couple of years.

“If we adjust for inflation or consider production costs, $4 feeders aren’t what they used to be. It takes $4-plus feeders to generate the net returns we used to get from lower prices,” he explains. “These are profitable prices for ranchers — and it’s about time.”

Tonsor predicts feeder cattle prices to continue under current conditions but does not predict increased profitability due to increasing operating costs.

“The 2025 bull market has been exceptional by every measure,” summarizes Lance Zimmerman, RaboResearch Food & Agribusiness senior beef industry analyst. “500-lb. steer prices are now more than 50% higher than last year, and 800-lb. steer prices are nearly there at just under a 50% price increase year-over-year.”

As a frame of reference, the CME feeder cattle cash index, which captures the average 700 lb. to 899 lb. steer price, averaged $367.08/cwt. the week of Oct. 20. This fall, livestock auction markets across the country have reported lightweight feeder cattle surpassing the $4 mark.

“I think it is entirely possible for feeder cattle to get to $4,” says Don Close, Terrain Ag senior animal protein analyst. “However, I think it will be late summer and fall 2026.”

According to Close, there are three critical components for feeder prices today:
1. Mexican border reopening
2. What disruptions could come to the beef-on-dairy supply
3. Feed prices

“Of that list, Mexico border closure is the real wild card,” he explains. “I don’t see a measurable disruption to beef-on-dairy or feed costs in the near term.”

When Will We Hit the High?

Oklahoma State University’s Derrell Peel, Extension livestock marketing specialist, explains the highest average prices are likely a year or more after heifer retention begins.

“We don’t have any confirmation heifer retention has started to any significant level in 2025,” Peel says. “We have already pushed off any signs of herd rebuilding by one to two years longer than I earlier expected, and we are looking at extending it another year if heifer retention does not start in the fourth quarter. Because the response has been much slower this time than previous cattle cycles, prices have certainly gone higher than I would have expected a year or two ago — though I did expect record-high prices.”

Peel predicts the next expansion phase will be different than the 2014-19 expansion cycle.

“The 2014-19 herd expansion was historically rapid, this current one is historically slow,” he says. “It is a combination of a lengthy list of factors that combine to make this a slow response, and it looks like it will remain a slow, lengthy process.”

Close shares his thoughts on the complexities of the current cycle:

Drought and economic stress. “As an industry, we didn’t fully recognize the severity of the drought as well as the degree of economic stress to the sector,” he says. “The fallout of the 2014 to 2015 price drop is still fresh on producers’ minds, so they have been using the prices of the past three years to get balance sheets in order, pay down debt and now are starting to make capital improvements.”
Producer age. “The average age of cow owners is a factor, so many have used current prices to liquidate and retire,” he says.
Female costs. “Replacement female prices that range from $3,000 to $5,000 restricts and scares some away,” he says. “That is only compounded with the addition of current interest rates.”
Cow size. The escalation in average cow size limits how many cows can run on a given unit of pasture.“
Land. “You hear producers make comments on the difficulty to find additional pasture in order to expand,” he says.

“This cycle has been driven or limited from a combination of all the above,” he says. “Our view is we need to rebuild by 2 to 2.5 million head. Keep in mind, given the escalation in carcass weights, we don’t need as many cattle to produce an equal quantity of beef.”

Close adds his thoughts regarding the impact of last week.

“Given all of the turmoil over the past week it is going to be even more difficult to trigger expansion,” he says. “There is no work around for destroyed producer confidence. I think current market action will further delay expansion.”

Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor Predicts Bull Market to Continue

Cattle prices are expected to stay high well into 2026, according to the latest Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor from Farm Journal. Nearly half of agricultural economists surveyed (47%) believe the current bull market in cattle could continue another 19 to 24 months, while another 27% say it could last 13 to 18 months. Only 7% expect prices to peak within the next six months.

“This run isn’t over,” one economist wrote. “At current prices we will see no or little herd expansion.” Another adds the fundamental supply side remains tight: “Clear signals that domestic beef production is increasing may be the key catalyst for a market top.”

“This is a nature of biology to some extent, it takes a while once you even start to retain a heifer for that heifer to produce a calf that then becomes a feeder calf that then becomes a fed calf that then becomes beef at the grocery store itself,” says Ben Brown, an Extension economist with the University of Missouri. “I don’t think we’ve seen necessarily the top of this cattle market yet.”

Even if cattle prices are close to seeing a top, that doesn’t mean prices will crash, he adds.

October Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lindsey Pound)

What Could End the Rally?

When asked what might trigger a peak in cattle prices, responses to the Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor were mixed — but demand destruction and herd rebuilding topped the list. Economists were asked to choose between five options, including:

The reopening of the U.S./Mexico border to Mexican feeder cattle imports
U.S. economic concerns with fallout from trade tensions with China
Removal of tariffs that would resume high levels of beef imports from Brazil
Demand destruction in the U.S. market

One respondent notes, “All of the above are relevant, but clear signals that domestic beef production is increasing may be more important.” Others pointed to a slowing U.S. economy or producers “beginning to hold back replacement heifers” as potential turning points.

“I have no idea what creates the top, but at current prices, we will see no/little herd expansion,” adds yet another economist.

“Beef Prices Can Stay High Longer Than Most Expect”

Economists agree the U.S. cattle market remains fundamentally strong, supported by limited supplies, robust export demand and solid retail prices. However, they caution the same forces keeping prices high — tight herds, high feed costs and inflation — could eventually cool the rally.

As one economist sums it up: “Beef prices can stay high longer than most expect — until consumers finally say ‘enough.’ That’s when we’ll see the turn.”

From Best Buy Toy to Pro Spray Drone: A Father-Son Duo Takes Flight In Missouri Cattle Country

Wed, 15 Oct 2025 19:41:27 GMT

Iowa State University freshman Rhett Keaton and his father, Vance, are launching a drone spraying side hustle.

The father-son duo started out just having some fun several years ago, buzzing around the house with a $20 drone from Best Buy that “drove mom crazy”. But now, they are getting serious about turning entertainment to revenue.

Vance, who runs 5K Cattle Company out of Anderson, Mo., ran out and purchased a DJI Agras T20P spray drone this spring, and both Keatons secured the Part 107 Commercial Pilot Certificate needed to operate on a farm. Combined with the private pesticide applicator’s license 5K Cattle Co. already held, the guys can now apply restricted-use pesticides to their own pasture ground.

University of Missouri Extension experts recently weighed in on the promise of drone usage in farming, and more specifically, in cattle operations. Field specialist Caleb O’Neal likens the technologies’ versatility and practicality to that of a UTV.

“Back in the 1980s, it would have been rare to see a UTV being used on a farm,” he says. “Visiting farms today, I’m hard-pressed to find an operation larger than 20 acres that doesn’t have some type of UTV that they utilize on a regular basis.”

And while the Keaton’s are banking on custom application services with a spray drone as their next play in ag, you don’t have to spray crops or weeds to use drones for the benefit of your farm or ranch, according to O’Neal.

Use of drones in agriculture is increasing as row crop and livestock producers find new ways to improve efficiency and productivity.

(Photo courtesy of Caleb O’Neal.)

“Livestock producers can monitor fences and availability of water and can make sure animals are where they should be without even opening a gate,” O’Neal explains. “Drone technology lets cattlemen quickly check estrus indication patches for optimized breeding timing, monitor cows during calving season, look for hidden newborn calves and look out for potential predators.

Getting back to the Keatons, the next step is for Rhett, who is majoring in ag systems technology in Ames this fall, to secure his Missouri commercial pesticide applicators license.

Once that happens, the pair can start marketing drone spraying services to neighboring farms. Their plan is to start locally with pasture and grassland applications before seeking out work on row crop farms to the north once foliar fungicide season hits.

Related - The Scoop Podcast: What’s Next For Ag Drone Application?

Even though the T20P is one of the smaller spray drones offered by DJI, Keaton says it’s proven to be the perfect fit so far. He also rents a neighbor’s spray drone, paying a per-acre fee, when he needs more than one bird to cover more ground.

“We do a lot of flying in and out of trees and stuff like that,” Keaton says. “Having that smaller drone with less capacity and a more efficient battery, I get about double the battery life as [the bigger drones] do. But I also have about half the tank.”

The reservoir on the T20P holds about 5.5 to 6 gallons of tank mix, so Keaton will usually need to land and refill his tank after about five or six minutes of spraying. He averages 23 acres per hour when everything is set up for a quick land-refill-takeoff cycle.

Keaton says Corteva’s DuraCor herbicide, an aerial application-approved formulation containing two Group 4 AIs, is the main product he’s been spraying from the drone thus far. The product label calls for 2 to 3 gallons of active ingredients (mixed with carrier water) applied per acre with coarse droplets.

A fellow rancher kicks the tires on Vance and Rhett Kaiser’s spray drone trailer at a field day event. The Kaisers operate 5K Cattle Company out of Anderson, Mo., and have plans to launch a spray drone custom application business in the near future.

(Rhett Keaton )

Keaton and Vance also picked up a nicely appointed spray drone trailer off — of all places — Facebook Marketplace. The whole setup – drone, trailer, extra batteries, etc. – cost about $30,000 all-in, Keaton says.

“We found one that was cheaper to buy than it was to build our own, especially with the generator — that is probably the most expensive part of that trailer,” he explains. “It already had the generator, pumps, the mix tanks and a thousand-gallon freshwater tank, and everything was lined up.”

With the spray drone in the air and the nice, shiny trailer parked edge-of-field as Keaton makes his passes, cleaning up weed escapes in fields that he says are “pretty clean” already, neighboring farmers often take notice and stop by to ask if he and his dad can come by and spray some of their ground, too. Their plan is to find the sweet spot between a $12 to $20 per acre fee to charge for their drone spraying services.

Speaking of sweet spots, O’Neal feels that spot spraying, guided by aerial imagery or even first-hand producer knowledge of where weed problems are significant and need to be addressed, is a good target for drone service providers like the Keatons.

“A pasture with a rash of blackberry weeds in isolated areas has great potential for a prescription herbicide application where only the problematic areas receive treatment via a spray drone, as opposed to a broadcast application where the entirety of the field is treated whether it needs it or not,” he says.

“I think there’s a lot of opportunity [for it] around us. There’s a lot of guys with hay fields, and they do a lot of burn down applications. That’s one thing we are planning on hitting on,” Keaton says. “I think some guys would be interested in that. Especially if we have a wet spring and guys can’t get in the field.”

Missouri Extension field specialist O’Neal agrees with that assertion.

“In my neck of the woods in southwestern Missouri, the topography can be quite unforgiving, with some areas too harsh to allow access by ground spray rig or even an ATV,” O’Neal says. “With an aerial piece of equipment like a utility drone, landowners can now get herbicide applications on these problematic areas and put them into useful forage production.”

With a pilot year of flying his family’s acres fastened securely under his belt, Keaton says the arrow looks to be pointing up on spray drone technology in agriculture.

“Hopefully we can expand and get maybe another trailer or a bigger drone, it just depends kind of on what’s calling for us,” he says. “I’ve got to see exactly how much work is out there in this business and from there just make it all work out. Our foot is just in the door [right now].”

Your Next Read: Now is the Time for Beef Producers to Invest with Purpose

How Missouri is Turning to Genetics and Technology to Boost Cattle Profits

Tue, 14 Oct 2025 13:46:21 GMT

Missouri’s cattle industry is experiencing a wave of optimism. Prices are soaring, herds are rebuilding and innovations in genetics and technology are transforming the business. At the center of it all is a homegrown initiative that’s quietly reshaping the future of beef production: the Show-Me Select Replacement Heifer Program .

Since 1997, this University of Missouri Extension program has become the gold standard for replacement heifer development, bringing cutting-edge science and data to pastures across the state.

Boom for Beef Producers

Cattle prices are climbing to levels not seen in years — and for longtime producers, the rewards have been hard-earned.

“It’s hard not to be in a good mood if you’re a cattle producer right now,” says Zac Erwin, regional livestock specialist with University of Missouri Extension. “This is the moment we’ve been waiting for for about the last decade.”

Erwin has worked with cattle producers for nearly 20 years, helping them navigate the ups and downs of a notoriously cyclical business. After the market peaked in 2013 and 2014, it plummeted in 2015 and stayed low for nearly a decade. Those who held on through lean years are now seeing the payoff.

“Those that were able to maintain inventory are certainly getting paid for their efforts,” Erwin says. “We’re also seeing new money coming into the business because of the profitability we’re currently experiencing.”

Grassroots Effort Becomes a National Model

The Show-Me Select Replacement Heifer Program was born out of a simple idea: add value to what was once considered an undervalued commodity — the heifer calf. It began as a grassroots initiative and has since grown into a model replicated across the U.S.

“This is really the gold standard for heifer replacement in the country,” Erwin says. “It started to raise the value of an undervalued commodity — and over the years, it’s snowballed.”

At its core, the program is about technology transfer: taking the latest university research — whether in breeding, pregnancy detection or genetics — and putting it directly into the hands of Missouri cattle producers.

Breeding Smarter with Technology

In the early days, the program focused on artificial insemination (AI) and ultrasound pregnancy diagnosis. Today, it’s moving into genomics and advanced reproductive tools that could revolutionize herd-building.

One of the newest developments is Doppler ultrasonography, championed by Thiago Martins, beef production state specialist at the University of Missouri. This technology allows producers to check a cow or heifer just 20 days after AI — a significant improvement over the traditional 28-day window.

“By exposing cows to two rounds of AI in 24 days, we got 85% of those animals pregnant,” Martins says. “If you compare that to natural service over 60 to 90 days, which gets you around 9% bred, the difference is huge.”

For producers looking to rebuild their herds with better genetics, this technology could be a game-changer.

Genomics: Peeling Back the Hide

The future of replacement heifer selection isn’t just about breeding more animals — it’s about breeding better animals.

“Genomic testing, especially on the commercial side, is relatively new to the beef industry,” explains Jamie Courter, state beef genetics Extension specialist. “With Show-Me Plus, producers can use DNA samples to unlock deeper insights into their heifers’ genetic potential.”

By understanding traits that can’t be seen — like longevity, calving ease and heifer pregnancy — producers can make more informed decisions. And while some are initially hesitant due to testing costs, Courter says the return on investment is clear.

“If you can show up at the sale barn with calves out of high genetic merit for traits like carcass weight, marbling and ribeye, buyers notice,” she says. “They love having that risk management — knowing what to expect when those cattle enter the feedyard.”

Proven Premiums and Long-Term Payoffs

The numbers speak for themselves. According to Erwin, Show-Me Select heifers routinely bring $200 to $300 more per head than comparable animals not in the program.

“Most sales this fall will be in the $4,000 range — and even above,” he says. “Over time, you build a reputation. Repeat buyers come back, and that puts more money in producers’ pockets. Those who stick with the program through good times and bad see the biggest rewards.”

Beyond the dollars, the program has had a transformative impact on rural communities, improving operations and livelihoods across Missouri.

Looking Ahead

The next Show-Me Select Replacement Heifer sale is set for Nov. 21 at the Joplin Regional Stockyards in Carthage, Mo., featuring around 275 spring-calving heifers. It’s more than just a sale; it’s a showcase of how genetics, technology and trusted branding can add real value to Missouri’s beef industry.

As Erwin puts it, “This program changes people’s lives.” And in today’s high-stakes cattle market, it may just shape the next decade of beef production.

USDA Has No Plans for Financial Incentives to Rebuild Cattle Herd

Fri, 26 Sep 2025 13:44:48 GMT

Colin Woodall, CEO of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), says currently USDA does not have plans for an incentive program to help rebuild the beef cow herd.

Woodall joined Farm Journal’s Chip Flory on “AgriTalk” Sept. 25. He was quick to dispel the idea of a herd rebuilding or replacement heifer incentive program.

“There is no financial incentive program,” he says. “Regardless of what you’ve heard, or who you have heard it from, that program does not exist.”

Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins mentioned a potential incentive program in a news release on Sept. 21 .

“In addition, USDA will soon release a significant plan to help rebuild the American cattle supply, incentivizing our great ranchers, and driving a full-scale revitalization of the American beef industry,” the release said.

Woodall explains how quickly the statement in the press release spread, noting it “lit like a grass fire” throughout the cattle industry and markets.

He points out that while Rollins’ team has been in contact with NCBA about potential support for cattle producers, a direct financial incentive is not part of their current plans.

“You can never rule out what the federal government might do,” Woodall says, but also emphasizes that based on current conversations, no immediate program is forthcoming.

Woodall suggests alternatives might include “rolling back some regulations” and making it “easier on cattle producers from a regulatory burden standpoint.”

A concern for Woodall is the potential market impact of an incentive. He says the NCBA team has specifically visited with Rollins’ team about how comments like an incentive program to rebuild the cow herd can have a significant market impact.

He was clear NCBA is not advocating for a financial incentive program, saying: “This is not something that NCBA is pushing for. It’s not something that we are endorsing.”

Thursday, Rollins was in Kansas City at the Ag Outlook Forum hosted by the Agricultural Business Council of Kansas City. During her comments she said because the cattle industry has seen a big drop in producers over the last decade USDA is committed to rebuilding it.

“Low inventory and high demand is not sustainable if we want to feed ourselves,” Rollins says.

She did announce there is no current plan to offer payments to beef producers.

“No plan for direct payments is even under consideration,” she explains. “The government getting involved in markets can easily mess things up.”

The plan will focus more on risk-mitigation tools and hope to attract the new generation of farmers to enter the cattle industry. She says more details will come in mid-October.

Your Next Read: The Battle at the Border

47% of Beef Producers Plan to Increase Herd Numbers

Mon, 15 Sep 2025 19:31:25 GMT

Takeaways from the 2025 State of Beef Industry survey reflect the industry is currently thriving financially but facing long-term structural challenges around herd rebuilding, succession planning and maintaining competitiveness through innovation and efficiency improvements.

Despite the challenges, optimism is rising: 47% plan herd growth, and two-thirds report profitability. Survey results summarize producers believe long-term success will depend on adaptability and innovation.

In its third year, Farm Journal’s State of the Beef Industry 2025 Survey, provides a comprehensive overview of the current status and outlook of the beef industry. The report surveyed 469 beef producers from across the U.S., focusing on those with cow herds that exceed 50 pairs or more than 500 on feed.

The year-over-year comparisons are starting to tell a story about what’s going on in the industry and the shifts producers are experiencing. Here are some key takeaways:

Two-thirds of producers have added new revenue streams like selling direct to consumer, developing a recipient herd, custom calving or hunting, which helps offset the risk of volatile markets.
Comparing the 2023 and 2024 surveys, the number of respondents who precondition calves before marketing has been consistent — 83% in 2025, 79% in 2024 and 82% in 2023.
Of the survey participants, 84% selected genetics and performance information as a consideration when buying bulls. Other top factors included disposition (79%) and phenotype or appearance (79%). Source came in at 56% and value 54%.

The State of the Beef Industry Report provides information to help producers when making decisions. Click here to download the full report.

Your Next Read: Are We Seeing Signs of Herd Rebuilding?

Are We Seeing Signs of Herd Rebuilding?

Fri, 12 Sep 2025 19:50:44 GMT

The U.S. beef cow inventory has reached its lowest point since 1962, marking what appears to be the bottom of the current cattle cycle. Tight supply is driving the strong pricing environment beef producers are enjoying today.

“For cow-calf producers right now, things are as good as they’ve probably ever been,” says Troy Rowan, University of Tennessee assistant professor. “Even though things are really good, producers are conscientious and vigilant about potential challenges,” Rowan summarizes.

Agreeing with Rowan, South Dakota cattleman Ken Odde adds while profits are currently strong, inflation quickly erodes economic gains. He stresses the importance of risk management and diversification.

Early Signs of Herd Rebuilding?

This is the million-dollar question: Are there encouraging signs of expansion?

“The beef industry is not currently in herd expansion mode, with producers hesitant to retain heifers due to high costs and economic uncertainties,” says Dave Weaber, Terrain senior animal protein analyst.

In Drovers State of Industry Report to be released the week of Sept. 15, we breakdown the July USDA cattle inventory and cattle on feed reports. While the USDA reports showed the smallest U.S. herd in history and continuing tightening numbers on feed, analysts predict producers have not experienced the highest cattle prices, yet.

“Our national herd size has the industry at an interesting point,” Rowan says. “Prices are at all-time highs, inputs are reasonable and more cow-calf enterprises are profitable than ever. When the industrywide rebuild will happen remains up in the air, but producers are keeping in mind that the high-flying industry right now is not going to stick around forever. They’re starting to adopt new technologies, leveling up their crossbreeding programs and expand opportunities for non-cattle related income on their ranches.”

Weaber adds producers need to be intentional about herd expansion, understanding the financial implications of adding new cattle.

Beef-on-Dairy Fills the Beef Supply Gap

“The current dynamics of supply is going to be a challenge,” says Jarrod Gillig, Cargill senior vice president, managing director for beef.

Gillig summarizes the cattle industry is experiencing a critical period of transition. He doesn’t expect the cow herd to return to previous peak levels of 32 million head. Instead, he predicts the gap in supply will be filled by beef-on-dairy calves.

Nick Hardcastle, Cargill senior director of meat grading and technical specialist, explains how the beef-on-dairy calves are an upgrade to the traditional Holstein steer and the positive impact they are making on beef supply.

“Beef-on-dairy is more desirable because it helped overcome several Holstein difficulties,” he says. “Improvements include red meat yield — more meat to a consumer — as well as improved acceptance in branded programs.”

Hardcastle says the beef-on-dairy cattle are filling the supply gap by filling pens in the Plains states where feeders are needed, and they are widely accepted by feeders and packers.

Defining Future Beef Producer Success

Odde says the beef industry is not just surviving but positioning itself for significant transformation.

“Producers who remain flexible, technologically savvy and strategic in their approach will be best positioned to thrive in this changing environment,” he says.

Weaber agrees saying successful producers will be those who can adapt, manage costs effectively and align themselves with evolving market trends.

“Don’t let cost get away from you,” Weaber warns, emphasizing that “being a low-cost, high-productivity producer means you get to make money seven, eight or nine years of the cycle.”

He stresses the importance of understanding financial implications, particularly during market transitions.

“If we’re not working on the business, we can’t work in the business,” Weaber adds, summarizing his philosophy regarding producers’ need to adopt more strategic, data-driven approaches.

The State of the Beef Industry Report includes input from nearly 500 beef producers. The annual report provides information to help producers when making decisions. Click here to download the full report.

Your Next Read: 47% of Beef Producers Plan to Increase Herd Numbers

Wisconsin Ag Regulators Propose Massive Livestock Fee Increases

Thu, 11 Sep 2025 19:24:36 GMT

The Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) is proposing changes to rules, ATCP 10 and 12 , regulating animal disease and movement and animal markets, dealers and truckers.

According to the Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation (WFBF) , these changes include massive fee increases that will be a substantial financial burden to markets, dealers and truckers that will unavoidably be passed down to farmers.

The license fee for what the DATCP calls “Animal Market Class A” would change from $420 to $7,430. A late fee for those markets would also increase by nearly 1,700% by shifting from the current price of $84 to $1,486. The registration fee paid by about 1,000 truckers transporting livestock in the state would increase 517%, from the current price of $60 to $370.

(Wisconsin Farm Bureau)

WFBF Government Relations Director Jason Mugnaini says it is important to clarify that Wisconsin’s program had historically received state funding support through DATCP, but this proposal shifts that onto industry fees.

The WFBF also reports the inspections and public health activity costs of these programs have previously been partially funded by state funding in Wisconsin, as they are in neighboring states. DATCP’s proposal shifts the full cost of these programs onto industry fees.

DATCP Secretary Randy Romanski explains the fees have not been adjusted since 2009 and the increases are needed to maintain critical animal health and transportation services.

“This program is currently in deficit because these have not been adjusted for so long,” Romanski explains. “Costs have increased during that time.”

He is transparent about the financial realities driving these increases. While the percentage increase might seem large, it reflects 17 years of accumulated cost pressures. He summarizes the goal is not to burden the industry, but to ensure the continued provision of critical animal health and movement services.

According to Sam GO, DATCP communications director, the DATCP Division of Animal Health receives federal funding through cooperative agreements for specific goals and objectives, such as animal disease surveillance and animal traceability. The cooperative agreements are separate from the programs in the proposed fee rules and do not fund the programs in the proposed fee rules.

She explains as federal funding for the cooperative agreements has decreased, those activities that are partially federally funded (such as animal disease surveillance and animal traceability) need to have a larger portion of their costs covered by the state animal health general program revenue. That means there is less state GPR remaining to cover the deficit in program revenue for the ATCP 10 and ATCP 12 programs.

The ATCP 10 fees support the following animal health programs: Certificate of Veterinary Inspection (CVI) Forms, Intermediate Handling Facilities, Disease Certifications (Brucellosis, Tuberculosis, Pseudorabies), Equine Infectious Anemia Retests, Equine Quarantine Stations, Feed Lots, Medical Separation, National Poultry Improvement Plan (NPIP), Farm-Raised Deer, and Fish Farms.

The Process

Romanski explains the administrative rule process is collaborative and takes about two and a half years. He says the process is designed to be collaborative with multiple opportunities for public input and engagement. He encourages stakeholders to not just critique the increases, but to offer constructive feedback and potential alternative solutions.

The current stage is specifically about public comment and engagement. He says the department wants to hear from industry members, producers and other stakeholders. They are actively seeking input that can help shape the final rule package.

The public can participate and provide feedback that can be considered by the department’s staff through several channels:

Attending public hearings
Submitting written comments by Oct. 15

The remaining hearings will be hosted virtually and at the Prairie Oaks State Office Building, Room 106, 2811 Agriculture Dr., Madison, WI 53708. For more information, dial-in instructions and to register for online access click on the ATCP 10 or 12.

ATCP 10:
• Monday, Sept. 15 – 1 p.m.
• Wednesday, Sept. 17 – 9 a.m.

ATCP 12 :
• Tuesday, Sept. 16 – 1 p.m.
• Wednesday, Sept. 17 – 1 p.m.

Individuals can submit written comments by Oct. 15 to: Angela.fisher1@wisconsin.gov or Angela Fisher, DATCP, P.O. Box 8911, Madison, WI 53708

Romanski explains after the public comment period, DATCP staff will review all submissions, consider suggested changes, and then present any revisions to their policy-making board. This ensures multiple layers of review and public involvement.

Neighboring State Comparisons

According to the proposal document , programs in adjacent states (Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Illinois) are similar to Wisconsin, as all are based on federal standards. Neighboring states primarily fund these types of programs through general program revenue; therefore, they have lower fees than Wisconsin’s current fees. While Wisconsin’s program fees are collected from a small number of licensees, these critical programs have impacts and benefits across animal health, animal industries and public health.

In Iowa, a livestock market permit is $50 per year. The livestock dealer and livestock market agent permits are $10 per year. A bull breeder license is $20 every two years. A livestock dealer or order buyer permit is $50 per year. A feeder pig dealer agent permit is $6 every two years. A pig dealer’s agent permit is $3 per year.

In Michigan, an action Class I is $400 per year. A buying station (Class II) is $250 per year. The remaining fees are waived for veterans: A dealer (Class III) is $50 per year. An agent broker (Class III) is $50 per year. A collection point (Class III) is $50 per year. A trucker (Class IV) is $25 per year.

In Minnesota, a livestock market agency and public stockyard is $300 per year. A livestock dealer is $100 per year. A livestock dealer agent is $50 per year.

In Illinois, a livestock auction market license is $200 per year. The livestock dealer license is $25 for a new license, $10 for the annual renewal, as well as $10 for each location in addition to the first location, and $5 for each employee. A feeder swine dealer license is $25, the renewal is $10, and there is a fee of $5 for each employee. There is no fee for a slaughter livestock buyer’s license, just a requirement to submit an annual report.

Industry Feedback

Both the Wisconsin Cattlemen’s Association (WCA) and WFBF have come out opposed to the fee increases.

Tressa Lacy, WCA president from Rio, Wis., voiced her concern at the first hearing on Sept. 11.

“The Wisconsin Cattlemen’s Association is in opposition to the proposed fee increases inspections and registrations related to a variety of activities by Wisconsin animal dealers, truckers and markets in ATCP 10 and 12,” she says. “I raise beef cattle with my husband and our 8-month-old in Columbia County. We both work off the farm in agriculture to financially afford our beef and hay farm operation, and I know the cost of these fees will be passed directly on to producers like us.

“The result of such significant increases will be fewer livestock marketing options, the potential for reduced disease traceability and fewer opportunities to sell livestock in the state of Wisconsin. Fewer options inevitably mean lower prices and thinner margins in an industry that is already being pushed on thin profit lines.”

She explains the inspections and animal health protections funded by these programs serve a broad public purpose — protecting animal health and consumer confidence in the meat raised in Wisconsin.

“It is fundamentally unfair to shift the entire cost onto the users as this is certainly a public food safety conversation,” Lacy adds. “I share the industry concern that these initial proposals are just the start of all programs in Wisconsin shifting to being user funded. Other states fund these programs with state support as the benefits are shared by everyone. DATCP should restore and continue the approach for these outlined programs.”

She concluded her comments saying: “WCA respectfully ask that DATCP reconsider these unreasonable fee increases and maintain a funding structure with state support that is fair, practical and supportive of both public health and Wisconsin agriculture.”

Mitch Giebel a WFBF member from Lyndon Station, Wis., also shared his thoughts on the proposed fee increases.

“I’m very concerned about the massive increases of fees being proposed,” he says. “As a young farmer, every dollar really does matter on our operation. We work hard to raise our livestock, and we already face high input costs, tight margins and unpredictability when it comes to marketing. Adding thousands of dollars in new fees, especially increases as massive as what is proposed doesn’t seem realistic. It’ll undoubtedly make it harder and tighter for the sale barns and livestock markets to survive, and unavoidably, it is probably going to be passed to us as the producers and farmers.”

He also explains programs such as animal health, disease control and traceability benefit everybody in the state, not just farmers.

“Healthy animals and safe food are the best interest for our state; other states recognize that and utilize state funding to maintain these programs and cover these costs,” he says. “Wisconsin needs to restore and maintain its state funding that has historically existed for these programs, rather than shifting a substantial burden on a small number of farmers and marketers. I am asking you to please reject these fee increases as they are written. They are too steep, too fast and out of line with our neighboring states.”

WFBF is calling on producers to share their concerns: “These unprecedented fee increases cannot move forward without your voice being heard. Share how these proposals would impact your farm, your business and Wisconsin agriculture.”

Rust in the Ration: How to Combat Southern Rust’s Impact on Corn Silage

Thu, 04 Sep 2025 14:04:48 GMT

With the warm and wet conditions this season, southern rust is on the rise in Midwest corn crops. It may be time to start considering the impact that could have on corn silage and preparing to adjust rations accordingly. While southern rust is not a direct threat to herd health, it has been shown to lower the nutritional value of silage and can compromise feed quality.

Southern rust, a fast-developing fungal disease caused by Puccinia polysora, does not itself produce toxins, but it weakens the plant and provides the opportunity for other diseases to move in. These opportunists include various Furasium species, which produce mycotoxins (fumonisin and deoxynivalenol) that can be harmful in feed.

Southern Rust and Corn Silage Quality

Southern rust is known to impact corn silage quality. A study from the University of Florida showed increasing rust infestation resulted in increased dry matter and fiber fractions, but that dry matter digestibility decreased by 13%. Further, high rust silages had lower neutral detergent fiber digestibilities than medium and no rust silages. Southern rust also affected the concentrations of lactate and volatile fatty acids, causing both to decrease with increasing infestation. These results indicate decreased nutritive value.

The observed increased dry matter also reduced silo packing effectiveness. If moisture levels are too low at harvest, it is difficult to achieve adequate packing, which leads to poor fermentation and an increased risk of mold growth.

Because southern rust coverage reduces the photosynthetic area of the leaf, grain fill is often hindered, leading to a lower energy and protein content in the silage.

Southern Rust Silage Management

There are a handful of strategies producers can apply to counteract the effects of southern rust:

Adjust harvest time based on moisture content. Southern rust can cause corn to dry down faster than normal. Monitor moisture levels closely to ensure the proper fermentation of silage.
Consider a silage inoculant. Inoculants improve fermentation, and the rapid pH drop can inhibit mold and yeast growth.
Ensure good packing and storage. Pack silage well to limit oxygen exposure and prevent mold growth. Cover bunkers immediately and weigh down coverings thoroughly.

Feeding Southern Rust Silage

To counter the nutritional challenges of feeding southern rust-infected corn silage, dietary supplementation may be necessary.

Prior to inclusion, test all potentially infected silage for mycotoxins. This will allow you to determine the safety of the feed and avoid potential health issues. If mycotoxins are high, the incorporation of a mycotoxin binding agent into the ration will help reduce toxin absorption in the animal’s digestive tract. Additionally, supplementation with antioxidants, such as vitamin E and selenium, could help animals by countering oxidative stress caused by mycotoxins and supporting immune function.

If grain fill was affected and starch levels are low, you may need to incorporate an additional energy course to compensate. Further, poor grain fill could reduce the already low protein content of corn silage, and protein supplementation may be required.

When incorporating infected silage, ensure it is thoroughly mixed into the TMR to dilute potential ‘hot spots’. Inclusion levels of contaminated silage in the feed may need to be limited or removed entirely for sensitive animals, including lactating or breeding animals. Livestock should be monitored closely for symptoms of mycotoxin toxicity, such as reduced intake, weight loss, digestive issues or reproductive challenges. Be prepared to respond if issues arise.

When feeding corn silage infected with southern rust, caution is essential to protect livestock health and performance. The thoughtful use of compromised silage can help minimize risk while maintaining efficiency and animal well-being.

Your next read: Southern Rust Set To Take Big Bite Out Of Midwest Corn Crop?

Instead of Making Hay: 4 Profitable Alternatives For Cattle Producers to Consider

Wed, 06 Aug 2025 14:11:28 GMT

If you didn’t make hay, what could you do instead?

Carson Roberts, Missouri extension state forage specialist, says the consensus in the beef industry is making your own hay is the cheapest way to feed cattle through the winter.

“This couldn’t be further from the truth,” he explains. “Hay is expensive to make and expensive to feed.”

Encouraging producers to think outside the box, Roberts recently shared “ 10 Reasons You Should Quit Making Hay .” His point No. 6 suggests producers consider profitable alternatives instead of traditional hay production.

He recommends these four alternatives will often pay more per acre than producing hay:

1. Stockers

“Often, you’re lucky to break even on your hay enterprise — especially if you’re a small operation with a lot of overhead,” Roberts says. “With stockers, you’re looking at $766 per acre in gross revenue.”

He refers to research done by Eric Bailey, Missouri extension beef nutrition specialist, that found one acre can produce approximately 350 lb. of beef and with a $2.19 value of gain. If you add in the cost, it is about $200 more per acre than a hay crop.

He adds this approach can be nearly as profitable as crop production in some years. This year, crop production is not profitable at all, meaning that you would make approximately $200 more by running stockers than row crops, too.

2. Custom Grazing

“Custom grazing offers lots of flexibility with very little expense,” he explains.

Roberts says, on average, custom grazing rates are $1.75 to $2.50 per day per head.

“Let’s say a cow is consuming 30 lb. of forage per day. During that spring flush, you’re able to produce 1,000 to 3,000 lb. of grazable forage. Let’s be conservative and assume that we can harvest 1,500 lb. of forage. Divide that by 30, and you’ll see that you can graze 50 animals per acre for one day. At a rate of $1.75 you’re looking at $87 per acre or $116 per ton of forage during that 3-month spring flush.”

3. Grazing Home-Raised Cattle

He says this option is particularly effective for fall-calving herds using excess springtime forage when cattle can gain up to 3 lb. per day during spring flush, increasing their market value.

Home-raised stocker calves are a great low-hanging fruit. They are already adapted to your farm and management style. You can utilize the spring flush to put weight on weaned calves to sell them mid-summer.

4. Cull Cow Grazing

Roberts says cull cows may be the only class of animals that increases in per pound value as they get fatter. Traditionally, the cull cow market is at its annual peak during mid-summer, which is a perfect time to start destocking in preparation for stockpiling fescue.

He suggests purchasing or retaining thin cull cows in the spring and then grazing for a few months. You can then sell in July or August for a profit with a cheap cost of gain.

Roberts summarizes the goal of all these enterprises is to turn that cheap springtime grass into a high value product. These alternatives focus on maximizing land use, reducing feed costs and creating additional revenue streams beyond traditional hay production

“The key is matching cattle production cycles with forage availability,” he says.

He emphasizes these strategies are most applicable in the fescue belt but can be adapted to various regions across the U.S.

“You must have an open mind if you want to make a profit,” he adds. “Things are different now than they were 50 years ago. We can be far more profitable if we adapt.”

Your Next Read: 10 Reasons You Should Quit Making Hay