Beef Trade Update

Derrell S. Peel, Oklahoma State University Extension Livestock Marketing Specialist

 

For the first four months of the year, beef exports are down 9.0 percent year over year from record exports in 2022 following a 12.0 percent decrease in April compared to last year. With beef production falling, a relatively strong dollar and some global macroeconomic weakness, a decrease in exports has been expected. Thus far in 2023, South Korea is the largest beef export destination, outpacing Japan in the months of March and April to achieve a 23.3 percent share of total beef exports. South Korea, along with Mexico were the only major beef export markets to be larger year over year in April.

 

Beef exports to Japan were lower in March and April, including a 27.0 percent year over year decrease in April. For the January to April period, beef exports to Japan are down 7.3 percent year over year. Japan has a 22.7 percent share of total beef exports for the January through April period. Beef exports to the combined market of China/Hong Kong were down 3.6 percent in April and are down 8.8 percent year over year for the first four months of the year. China/HK remains the third largest beef export market with a 19.0 percent share of total beef exports thus far in 2023.

 

Beef exports to Mexico were up 5.6 percent in April and are up 14.9 percent year over year for the year to date. Mexico represents 9.5 percent of total beef exports thus far in 2023, up from an 8.0 percent share for the year 2022. Canada is the number five market for U.S. beef exports, down 10.5 percent so far this year and holding a 7.5 percent share of total beef exports.

 

Beef imports were up 0.4 percent year over year in April but are down 2.1 percent for the January through April period compared to last year. Beef imports are likely to increase in 2023 as beef supplies in the U.S. decrease and prices increase. The same strong dollar that is a headwind for beef exports tend to make U.S. markets more valuable.

 

Canada is the largest source of beef imports, with a 25.7 percent share of total imports. April beef imports from Canada were down 4.7 percent but are up 4.6 percent for the year to date. Brazil jumped out to an early lead in January, claiming the bulk of the "other country" quota, but has dropped sharply since then. April beef imports from Brazil were down 12.9 percent year over year and leaving the year-to-date total down 11.7 percent year over year. Brazil currently has a 19.6 percent share of total imports. Mexico is the third largest source of beef imports with an 18.1 percent share of the total. Beef imports from Mexico are declining with April imports down 11.6 percent and imports down 13.8 percent thus far in 2023. Imports of beef from New Zealand and Australia both jumped sharply in April with imports from New Zealand up 40.2 percent and from Australia up 35.9 percent year over year. So far this year, beef imports from New Zealand represent 13.4 percent of total imports with Australia accounting for 12.0 percent of the total. Beef trade remains generally robust and supportive to the U.S. market despite the changes that are occurring in the U.S. beef market.

 

Derrell Peel, OSU Extension livestock marketing specialist, explains how drought improvements have impacted beef prices on SunUpTV from June 10, 2023.

 

Sweep Tubs vs. Bud Box

Mark Z. Johnson, Oklahoma State University Extension Beef Cattle Breeding Specialist

 

In a cattle working facility, the function of the crowding area, often called a "tub" is to funnel cattle into alleyway on the way to the squeeze chute or loadout. The crowding area must be designed and located so cattle can be easily moved into this area from a common sorting alley that is fed by holding pens. There are two commonly used systems that offer differing advantages which we cover this week.

 

Sweep Tub

The circular crowding area, with totally enclosed sides and crowding gate, is effective because the only escape route visible to the animal is through the alleyway leading to the squeeze chute or loadout. To further encourage cattle to exit crowding area, the solid crowding gate is intermittently moved toward a closed position. This effectively restricts the cattle to a successively smaller area as they move into the alleyway. A roughened concrete floor is desirable to provide an all-weather surface and for ease in cleaning. This design of cattle working facilities is to use circular crowding areas and working chutes. The circular designs take advantage of cattle's tendency to circle and crowd toward the outside of a curved passage. The curved crowding area and working chute encourages cattle to move in a continuous flow toward the squeeze chute. Solid enclosures shield the animals' vision from distractions outside the working area while focusing their attention on moving out of the crowding tub. When a balky animal needs to be prodded, it is only a short walk from the squeeze chute to any location along the curved working alleyway. Consequently, cattle can normally be worked in less time with a curved alleyway than with a straight one. The crowding alley also should be curved with totally enclosed sides. Cattle move more freely because they cannot view the cattlemen or squeeze chute until they approach the palpation cage or rear gate of the squeeze chute. Sloping sides in the working alleyway confine the animal's feet and legs to a narrow path which, in turn, reduces balking. Sloping sides also reduce the capability of an animal to turn around in the crowding alley. Sloping sides are well matched to cow-calf operations because varied sizes of cattle can be worked efficiently in the same system. Recommended width for the bottom of the alleyway is 16 inches with the top at 28 inches. Emergency release panels can be constructed as movable crowding alley side panels that can be opened. An important consideration is that the cattle handler does not need to been inside the sweep tub. The handler works from the outside of the tub and alleyway while processing the cattle.

 

Bud Box

The same concepts regarding the alleyway leading to the squeeze chute or loadout still apply. The primary difference is the way in which cattle are coaxed into the alleyway. The Bud Box is a rectangular pen in which the alleyway leading to the chute is placed at a right angle at the point of entry. The design is simple and with proper handling techniques can be highly effective. Cattle are brought into the box and the position of the handler along the opposite side of the box stimulates cattle to move by the handler and into the alleyway. The gate that is closed behind the cattle as they moved past the alley forms the box. The Bud Box requires a basic understanding of cattle handling principles and may require additional training for inexperienced producers. The effectiveness of the design and the manner in which cattle flow into the alley is the result of the cattle handling skills and the attitude of the handler. Proper use of the box requires the cattle handler to be inside the box with the cattle.

 

The Bud Box contrasts the large, circular, sweep systems described above. The absence of large fabricated bends make it easier to construct. The box typically has open sides and does not require crowding gates which reduces the material cost and footprint of the facility. A typical box is 12 feet wide and 20 feet long. It is closed on one end with a gate at the other end. A Bud Box can be constructed and deconstructed from portable panels. Accordingly it offers the advantage of being tried on a temporary basis.

 

Summary

The decision of incorporating a Sweep Tub or Bud Box into your cattle working system should be based on considering a number of factors determining what is the best fit for your budget and type of operation. There are numerous YouTube videos available on the web showing examples of working cattle through, and the construction of, both sweep tubs and Bud Boxes.

 

References:

A.J. Tarpoff, et. al., Designing a Bud Box for Cattle Handling, Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service.

 

Ken Apple, Raymond L. Huhnke and Sam Harp. Modern Corral Design. Oklahoma State University Cooperative Extension Service.

 

Mark Johnson, OSU Extension beef cattle breeding specialist, explains how to properly manage cattle facilities on SunUpTV's Cow-Calf Corner from June 17, 2023.

 

Bovine Core Vaccination Guidelines

Rosslyn Biggs, DVM, Oklahoma State University State Extension Beef Veterinarian

 

The American Association of Bovine Practitioners (AABP) provides guidance to their membership on vaccination guidelines identifying core vaccine for all cattle. The establishment of bovine core vaccines was created based on the major infectious agents that require protection in all types of cattle. The list is in no way permanent and will be regularly reviewed. Future changes to core vaccine recommendations may occur based on new scientific research, veterinary feedback, and evolving production practices. Veterinarians and producers alike are required to follow applicable federal and state regulatory regulations.

 

The core guidelines help establish a set of minimum requirements, however, there is no one-size-fits-all vaccination plan applicable to every farm and ranch. Specific, unique operation or herd vaccination plans, established by producers and veterinarians, insure the development of the best herd protection. A specific vaccination plan will be based on factors such as animal immune status, disease risk, biosecurity, and management availability. The best vaccine options will be those that provide protective immune coverage for diseases of concern balanced with a defined management timeline and expense.

 

The following bovine vaccines are considered core vaccines according to AABP guidelines for all beef and dairy cattle:

 

•  Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis virus (IBRV) (Bovine herpesvirus 1)
• Bovine Viral Diarrhea Virus (BVDV)
• Parainfluenza Virus (PI3)
• Bovine Respiratory Syncytial Virus (BRSV)
• Clostridial Vaccines (C. hemolyticum and tetani are not considered core, but are considered risk-based)

The AABP guidance also outlines vaccines that should be evaluated for inclusion into operation specific vaccination protocols based on risk of disease and benefits of vaccination. Cattle type, disease risk, operation location, biosecurity practices, and herd history are all factors considered when evaluating risk based agents such as Brucella abortus (Bangs) and Mannheimia haemolytica.

 

Producers are encouraged to sit down with their veterinarian and discuss vaccination protocols on a regular basis. The AABP vaccination guidelines are intended to help with this conversation. Specific, unique vaccination protocols customized to the operation, and even further to individual types of cattle on the farm or ranch, provide the best immunization coverage. When designing a plan, remember to include a periodic review schedule. Update the plan regularly with your veterinarian to take advantage of new scientific findings and economic solutions as disease threats continue to evolve.

 

Rosslyn Biggs, DVM, OSU Extension beef cattle specialist, takes an in-depth look at handling and administering vaccines on SunUpTV. This segments originally aired Jan. 22, 2022.