CALF_News_June_July_2020

7 CALF News • June | July 2020 • www.calfnews.net Continued on page 11  Creative:Clients:Micronutrients:1500-26147 2020 Beef Print Ads:1500-26147 2020 Beef Print Ad_Calf News_7.25 x 4.875_v13.indd.indd May 11, 2020 8:27 AM Still feeding sulfate trace minerals? How distasteful. www.micro.net | (317) 486-5880 1 Wiebusch. 2015. JAM. 2 Caramalac et al. 2017. J. Anim. Sci. 95:1739-1750. 3 Micronutrients trial #2017BC106USCZM. IntelliBond ® is a registered trademark of Micronutrients, a Nutreco company. © 2020 Micronutrients USA, LLC. All rights reserved. Smart minerals, smart nutrition... smart decision Calves prefer the taste of supplements with IntelliBond ® more than 2 to 1 vs. sulfate trace minerals. 1-3 Did you know cattle have 25,000 taste buds? That makes them extra-sensitive to the bad taste of free metals from sulfate trace minerals in the ration, and causes them to consume less feed. But when you feed IntelliBond ® trace minerals instead, calves keep eating. Studies show calves prefer supplements that include IntelliBond ® more than 2 to 1 vs. sulfate trace minerals . 1-3 Ask your nutritionist about the tastier trace mineral option. Learn more at micro.net/species/beef. (DOJ) to determine any possible wrong- doing by packers. On May 6, Reuters reported that President Trump had urged the DOJ to investigate allegations that packers broke antitrust laws. “I’ve asked the Justice Department to look into it. ... I’ve asked them to take a very serious look into it because it shouldn’t be happening that way and we want to protect our farmers,” the Presi- dent told reporters at a White House event attended by Sec. of Agriculture Sonny Perdue.“Are they dealing with each other? What’s going on?” the Presi- dent asked, according to Reuters. Supply-demand disruption As COVID-19 spread to packing plants, employee health and safety forced many to temporarily close. Such actions may continue. Besides thorough sanitiz- ing over and above strict government- controlled cleaning that helps keep U.S. beef and pork the safest worldwide, packers had to establish “social distanc- ing” for employees and outfit them with personal protective equipment (PPE). Worst of all, the backed up, highly synchronized pork supply chain forced some producers to euthanize thousands of hogs. Some milk producers dumped much of their product after dairies lost major markets when restaurants and schools were forced to close nationwide. With the temporary shutdown or reduced speed of processing at beef pack- ing plants, weekly cattle slaughter numbers were reduced 30 to 40 percent or more. “Before decreasing sharply in mid- April, weekly cattle slaughter had aver- aged 634,300 head per week for the first 14 weeks of the year, up 4.3 percent year over year,” notes Derrell Peel, Oklahoma State University (OSU) livestock mar- keting economist. At the same time, anxious and fear- ful consumers wiped out meat counters. Retail demand increased for packers. Con- versely, their livestock demand decreased due to a smaller processing capability. Many finished cattle had nowhere to go. Numbers built up.“Producers wanted to market a volume larger than plants were positioned and capable to handle,” says Glenn Tonsor, Kansas State University agricultural economist, in a recent K-State AgManager r eport. More cash trade needed Along with antitrust disputes, many questioned whether formula or grid pricing were damaging cash markets and price discovery. There are calls for Con- gress to mandate more cash trade. In an April NCBA podcast, Darryl Blakey, NCBA associate director, Oklahoma State’s Derrell Peel sees a long journey back to average weekly slaughter numbers that pushed 630,000-plus seen in winter and early spring.