I l I I IIIIIIII RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF ALTERNATIVE MARKET OUTLETS USED BY MICHIGAN FARMERS IN SELLING LIVESTOCK Thesis for the Degree of M. A. MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE Glenn L. Johnson I942 l _ _l ,V .7 ‘ I .‘1'"' “-;.‘t -‘ (y; :xr,‘ {.11); Id “ ’1 a r, f... ‘ .. t -‘ ’ ‘ Jr, A» ‘5 ‘ U. . u ' . V. y I . I y "'r‘ R z ‘4‘ "T: ‘ ) - -._, t "-93 . 1‘ .. 1, r ‘ ~ ‘ 1.. _ P's 92"“‘32‘ r“) 3.7 _- , , ‘u\ , ‘ ' ,. ' ‘. V ' ' . If. I. 4" t '. . . . . ~ '- -‘ 1 . ' ’ a ‘ v . ' q , I. - . T f .(N' , » ‘ — -" t , ‘ '. ' I a , ' I t ,0 :14 . 2e \ ‘f .‘ . ’ I ? i‘f'stf 1" I ‘ K ' L. 3'.» 2;“ e ‘ H z . l ‘ . '\ —" . I ( . ‘ .‘ .- “-4 ;I’?VT;"\ ;- ’4 1’ A‘J‘ _ fi .' - I _ _ - - \ <21;- » OI' ~ i — ‘~ 0 ‘t 544)}. . . f.- .,i . 3:" ' r: 1'.“ .-. _5' A I. r .‘_Q. I. n} , .r -5Z . I . - u .3 ‘ I ‘Ie ETJI,‘ :53 j ‘ -O I! \( 0 ' ‘ sil‘ 9' m.jf This is to certify that ; . i3 the sis entitled f I'EIIhe Relative Importance of Alternative Market . : Outlets Used by Michigan Farmers in Selling _ Livestock." ‘ presented by Mr. Glenn.L. Johnson has been accepted towards fulfilment 4 of requirements for M. A. degree in Economics Dateflktcp/ 21. I742 '/ F ‘ 5" We; at" -- .f.-"- ,t': ,1»; VP; \“ 'Mf‘f‘ri-llfi~ N ‘L I '7. .‘J \ 4010;“. .1. ¥ - :4’,'T.'"a;I-.4 Ill/IIll/Ill!III/III/l/I/ll/l/I/III/Ill/l/l/I/II/ll/I/lll/I I. MSU LIBRARIES 37538 RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES wiII be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. ‘ RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF ALTERKATIVE MARKET OUTLETS USED BY M CHIGAN FARMERS IN SELLING LIVESTOCK by ‘ -./ 9mm L.“ JOHNSON A THESIS Submitted to the Graduate School of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfilment of the reouirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Economics 19u2 THESI: ACKNOT EDGE NTS I wish to express grateful appreciation to the Economics Section of the Michigan State College Agricultural EXperiment Station and to the Division of Marketing and Transportation Research of the Bureau of Agri- cultural Economics for making available to me the data on which this study is based. Grateful acknowledgement is due Professor H. S. Patton, Head of the Department of Economics, Michigan State College, for his advice and assis- tance in the organization and revision of the manuscript. Helpful sug- gestions as to scepe, procedure, and content were also supplied by Profes- sors R. V. Gunn, and O. Ulrey and Mr. D. H. Stark of the Agricultural Econ- omics staff; while guidance in statistical method was given by Dr. J. W. Grist and Dr. W. M. Baten of the Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station staff. Invaluable assistance in the preparation of the statistical tables and charts in connection with this study as a phase of the larger Exceriment Station project was rendered by Miss Virginia Bailey and Miss Betty Smith of the clerical staff of the Economics Department. The help and encouragement received at all times from my wife, M. Rosales, was one of the greatest factors contributing to the completion of this study; I am grateful and indebted to her for her efforts in this behalf. G. L. Johnson 5:. mawcmm Chapter . I INTRODUCTIO ..................................................... Purpose of investigation .............................. ‘Utility of the study .................................. Source and seeps or date .............................. Outline of procedure .................................. Use or terms .......................................... Functionsl enelysis or initial livestock market outlets II GEOGRLEEIG SUB‘DIVDSION OF THE BAIL AND L STITISTICAL EVALUATION . Arts 1: Southern livestock ares ...................... Area 2: Nerthern livestock ares ...................... Area 3: Upper Peninsula livestock ares ............... Statistical reliability or the date ........................ Geographic representativenees ......................... Size and representativeness of sample as to volume or term marketings .................................. III MOVEMENTS 0F CATTLE AND GALVEB T0 INITIAL MARKETS 0000090000000... Relative importance or market classes of cattle and 081703 by livestOCk mrketing area. eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Inter-ares differences in movements of cattle and calves through initial market outlets, by market classes ........ Shnghtar catth 000000000000000OOOOOOooooeooooooooooo. veal calves CO0.0.0.0...OOOOOOOOO‘OOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.000... Stocker end feeder cattle ............................. Dairy and breeding cattle ............................. ii Page MQGNHH 10 12 14 15 16 17 18 37 37 49 51 chapter IV mm OF 3068 AND PIm TO INITIAL MARKE'IB .......... Relative importance of market classes of hogs and P180 by livestock marketing areas ............. Inter-area differences in movements of hogs and pigs through initial market outlets, by market classes . Shughter hogs eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Radar has. 00.00.000.000.00.000000000000000 BrOOd1n3 hog. eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee V WEN'IB 0F SHEEP AND LAMBS TO INITIAL MARKEPS eeeeeeee Relative importance of the market classes of sheep and lambs by livestock marketing areas ............ Inter-area differences in movements of sheep and lambs through initial market outlets, by market 01.38895 O00.000.000.0000000000000000000000.00.0.0.0 Slaughter Sheep eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Feeder and stocker sheep ................... Breadlng sheep eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee n smmm CONCWSIOM ......0O..0...’..............O.. Relative importance of different market outlets for different species ............................. Factors influencing relative utilization of initial mket outlets eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Position of terminal markets as an initial outlet ... Some methodological conclusions ..................... BIBLIWBLPHY eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee AEPENDICES: A.- Questionnaire used .............................. B - Supplementary tables ............................ 111 P380 55 55 58 70 78 74 74 77 77 91 92 92 95 96 98 99 100 102 Teble 1. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 12. 13. 14. 113? OF EABLES ruse Percentage distribution of livestock sales as reported by the census and by 1515 combined sample farms, by livestock ma’ Michigan OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0,0000000.00000000000000000... 17 Average number of livestock sold per farm.reporting sales in 1940 census and in sample .............................. 20 Differences between sample means and between combined sample ”an. and the con”, man. eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 21 Size of sample needed to secure given degrees of accuracy 1“ Cupl. pruntase‘ eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 27 Evaluation of adequacy and reliability of the combined sample data for purposes of this study ........................... 30 Percentages which each class makes up of total cattle and calves marketed from.1515 farms by areas, Michigan 1940 ... 35 Percentages of slaughter cattle sold through alternative market outlets from 1515 farms, by areas, Michigan 1940 ... 38 Slaughter cattle; Percentage sold through each type of market outlet, classified by number sold per farm, by areas, H10h13an1940 OOOOOOOOGOO...0......COOOOOOOOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOO 59 Percentages of veal calves sold through alternative market outlets from 1515 farms, by areas, Michigan 1940 .......... 50 Percentages of stacker and feeder calves sold through alternative market outlets from 1515 farms, by areas, “101118“ 1940 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0000.00.00...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 52 Percentages of dairy and breeding cattle sold through alternative market outlets from 1515 farms, by areas, Michigan 1940 eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 53 Percentage which each class makes up of total hogs and pigs marketed from 1515 farms, by areas, Michigan 1940 ......... 56 Slaughter hogs: Percentage sold through each type of market outlet, classified by number sold per farm, by areas, Michigan194o 000.000.0000.00000000000000000000000DOOOOOOOO 59 Percentages of slaughter hogs sold through alternative outlets from.l515 farms, by areas, Michigan 1940................... 65 iv Table 15. Percentages of feeder hogs sold through alternative market outlets from.l515 farms, by areas, Michigan 1940 .......... 15. Percentages of breeding hogs sold through alternative market outlets from 1515 farms, by areas,.flichigan 1940 .......... B I B II B III B IV B‘V B VI B VII B VIII IPTENDII IABEEB Percentage of livestock sold through various types of outlets by 956 farmers in area 1, classified by ’pCOI... and 0133.03, 1940eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Percentage of livestock sold through various types of outlets by farmers in area 2, classified by species “a QIQBCGU, 1940 eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Percentage of livestock sold through various types of outlets by 140 farmers in area 5, classified by species .nd 61888... 1940 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO00.00.000.000. Percentage of livestock sold through various types of outlets by 1515 farmers in Huchigan, classified by species and 3188.08, 1940 0..OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO00.00.000.000 Percentages of slaughter livestock sold through each type of outlet in area 1, classified by number sold per farm for @8311 Species, 1940 eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Percentages of slaughter livestock sold through each type of outlet in area 2, classified by number sold per farm.for each species, 1940 ............................. Percentages of slaughter livestock sold through each type of outlet in area 5, classified by number sold per farm for each Species, 1940 eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Percentage of slaughter livestock sold through each type of outlet classified by number sold per farm.for each Special, Michigan, 1940eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Page 71 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 .ln'l 1'18“" 1. 2. 4. 5. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 14. LIST OF FIGURES Livestock survey regions and types of farming areas in mchim OCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOC0.0...0.0.0...OOOOOOOIOOOOOOOO. Distribution of 1294 farms reporting cattle and calves sold according to number sold per year compared to 1959 “Qua“, Michigan 1940 OOOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Distribution of 808 farms reporting hogs and pigs sold according to number sold per year compared to 1959 census, mchisan 1940 OOOOOOIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0000......000.00.... Distribution of 295 farms reporting sheep sold according to number sold per year compared to 1959 census, Michigan 1940 O’COCOOCOOOCOOOOOOOOOO0.00.0000...OOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOI. Percentages which each class makes up of total cattle and calves marketed from.l515 farms, by areas, Michigan 1940 . Percentages of slaughter cattle sold through alternative outlets, according to number sold per farm.per year, from 9“ ram. area 1’ 1940 00....0.00.00.00.00.0.00.00.00.00. Percentages of slaughter cattle sold through alternative outlets, according to number sold per farm.per year from ‘19 farm, area 2’ 1940 .OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOI.0.0.0.000... Percentages of slaughter cattle and calves sold through alternative outlets, according to number sold per farm per year from 140 farms, area 5, 1940 .................... Percentages of slaughter cattle and calves sold through alternative outlets, according to number sold per farm per year from 1515 farms, Michigan, 1940 ..................... Percentages of cattle and calves sold through alternative outlets from.956 farms, area 1, Michigan, 1940 ........... Percentages of each class of cattle and calves sold through alternative outlets from 419 farms, area 2, 1940 . Percentages of each class of cattle and calves sold through alternative outlets from 140 farms, area 5, 1940 ......... Percentages of each class of cattle and calves sold through alternative outlets from.l515 farms, Michigan, 1940 ...... Percentages which each class makes up of total hogs and pigs marketed from 1515 farms, by areas, Michigan, 1940 .. vi 11 23 25 36 40 41 42 43 45 47 57 rigure 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 25. 27. 29, Percentages of slaughter hogs and pigs sold through alternative outlets according to number sold per farm per year from 956 rm., area 1, 1940 eeeeeeeeeessoeeeeeeeseeeeses Percentages of slaughter hegs and pigs sold through alternative outlets according to number sold per farm per year from 419 farms, area 2, 1940 ................................. Percentages of slaughter hogs and pigs sold through alternative outlets according to number sold per farm per year from.l40 farms, area 5, 1940 ................................. Percentages of slaughter hogs and pigs sold through alterna- tive outlets, according to number sold per farm per year from 1515 rm, Niobigan’ 1940 0.0.0000.0000000000000000000000.... Percentages of each class of hegs and pigs sold through alternative outlets from 956 farms, area 1, 1940 ............. Porcentages of each class of hogs and pigs sold through alternative outlets from 419 farms, area 2, 1940 ............. Percentages of each class of hogs and pigs sold to alternative markets from 140 farms, area 5, 1940 ......................... Percentages of each class of h0g8 and pigs sold through alternative outlets by 1515 farms, Michigan, 1940 ............ Percentages which each class makes up of total sheep and lambs marketed from 1515 farms, by areas, Michigan, 1940 ........... Percentages of slaughter sheep sold through alternative outlets, according to number sold per farm per year from 956 “m, we 1’ 194° 0000.00.00.00.00.000.000.00.000.000....0.. Percentages of slaughter sheep and lambs sold through alternative outlets from 419 farms, m8 2, 1940 seeeeeeeeeeee Porcentages of slaughter sheep and lambs sold through alternative outlets from 140 farms, Area 5, 1940 ............. Percentages of slaughter sheep and lambs sold through alternative outlets , according to number sold per farm per y‘ar rm. 1515 ram. Michigan, 1940 eeeeeeeeeeeeeeseeeeeeeeee Porcentages of each class of sheep and lambs sold through alternative outlets from 955 farms, area 1, 1940 ............. Percentages of each class of sheep and lambs sold through alternative outlets from 419 farms, Area 2, 1940 ............. vii Page 60 61 62 63 66 67 68 69 76 79 81 rigure 30. 31. 32. Page Percentages of each class of sheep and lambs sold ) , through alternative outlets from.l40 farms, Area 3’ 19‘0 COCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0 87 Percentages of each class of sheep and lambs sold through alternative outlets from 1515 farms, M1chigan, 1940 sseseeseeeeeseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesesees.s 88 Percentages of each species of livestock sold through alternative markets from 1515 farms, Michigan, 1940 assesseeeeseseseeeeeeseeeeeeeeseseeeee 93 viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ngpose 2;.Investigation. This study was undertaken with a view to making an economic and statistical analysis of a portion of data con- cerning livestock marketing gathered by the Economics Section of the Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station in cooperation with the Bureau of Agricultural Economics of the United States Department of Agriculture during the summer of 19h1.l/ A specific purpose of this study was to break down the above men- tioned state-wide data to show differences in the importance of each type of outlet by areas for each species, market classes thereof, and differ- ent sized producers. A concurrent major purpose of the study was to ascribe economic significance to the statistical findings of the study, The seven alternative types of initial markets for which this study attempts to ascertain the relative importance are as follows: (1) termi~ nal public markets, (2) concentration yards or local markets, (3) packing plants, (9) dealer or truck buyers, (5) local c00perative livestock mar- keting associations, (6) auctions or sale barns, and (7) farmer buyers or others.g/ l/This investigation of "Marketing Livestock in the Corn Belt Region," sponsored by the Division of Marketing and Transportation Research of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics, was conducted in c00peration with the Agricultural Emperiment Stations of fourteen north central states, using uniform schedules prepared by the sponsoring agency. AS a graduate re~ search assistant in the Department of Economics of Michigan State College, the author was employed in the statistical tabulation of data obtained by field representatives and mail questionnaires from over 1700 livestock producers in Michigan. 2-/For definition of terms used in designating these markets, see pp. A.Master's thesis by F. A. Voss entitled, "Marketing.fiichigan Live- stock; Survey of Transportation Trends and Market Outlets"3/ presents a large amount of material concerning livestock transportation and some material relevant to the importance of markets which have deveIOped as supplements to terminal markets. The present study does much to clarify the relative importance of all markets, as it is based on a larger, more representative sample, and includes an analysis by producing areas. DifA ferences in markets utilized for different areas, for each species and market class thereof, and for different sized producers are ascertained and presented in this study. Utility g§,the Study. The potential utility of this study lies in the need for overall information regarding the importance of initial livestock markets in various parts of the state. The importance of the livestock industry in Michigan can be judged from the following figures: There were 68,769,000 cattle and calves, 58,312,000 hogs, and 5h,fl73,000 sheep on farms in the United States, January 1, 19UO. Of these, 2.5 percent of the cattle and calves or 1,708,000, 1.5 percent of the hogs and pigs or 891,000, and 1.9 percent of the shfiep and lambs or 1,0u5,000, were on Michigan farms../ Sale of meat animals contributed $u7,583,000 cash farm income to Michigan farmers in 19MO which was their second most important source of income.5/ Contemporary war—time conditions tend to accentuate the importance of the livestock industry as its products are basic in the "Food for 3/Presented at Michigan State College (Department of Economics) in igho, E/.Agricultural Statistics, 19HO, U.S.D,A. i/Reference Book of the Meat Industry, American Meat Institute, Chicago, Illinois. Freedom" campaign. Priorities affecting livestock tranSportation, make it desirable to know about market utilization within specific areas of the state. The war emergency thus adds to the general need to know more about the utilization of initial market outlets by livestock producers. Source gndmg Egg. There are three sources of the primary data on which this thesis is based. They are as follows: (1) 23H sched- ules obtained by a field representative from a similar number of selected farms, (2) 695 questionnaires obtained as replies to approximately 5,000 letters sent to all Agricultural Adjustment Administration county com- mitteemen, and (3) 820 questionnaires obtained as replies to approximate— ly 10,000 letters sent to Agricultural Adjustment Administration c00pera~ tors other than committeemen who were selected at random,» The respective methods of selecting the farms for the three sets of data were somewhat as follows. The 23“ farmers interviewed by the field representative were located in representative spot areas in 26 counties, as selected by the field representative in collaboration with the county agent of the county being sampled. The 695 questionnaires from AAA committeemen are replies to letters sent to all such committeemen in the state of Michigan. The 820 questionnaires from AAA c00perators are replies to letters sent to every twentieth name on the lists of such cooperators in all counties,éy As the representativeness of these data is discussed in Chapter II, it suffices to state here that, as would be reasonably expected, a vary- ing amount of upward bias is present. é/The basis of sampling was devised by the economics section of Michigan State College. The statistical and geographic analysis is the personal work of the author and was not part of the work for which com- pensation was received from Michigan State College. The author has limited the scepe of the thesis to a consideration of those parts of the above mentioned questionnaires having to do with the utilization of the seven alternative market outlets by farmers sell- ing each of the three major species of livestock. Outline,gf,Procedure. Following is an outline of the general pro- cedure followed in conducting this study: 1. The 23M schedules filled out by the field representative were edited and then tabulated on large tabulation sheets according to counties. Tables requested by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics were filled out from these tabulated data. 2. The data on the 1515 questionnaires received from the combined AAA committeemen and c00perators' samples were edited and then transferred to tabulation cards. The cards were summarized by counties on a.special tabulating board. Results of this tabu- lation and summarization were used to fill in other tables re- questedby the Bureau of Agricultural Economical] ,. Three major livestock marketing areas following county and farm- ing type area lines were delimitated.§/ h, Probabilities of the data being random samples of each of these areas were ascertained. 5. Discrepancies between the census data and those appearing in the 23h schedules gathered by the field representative were found to be so large as to make this sample unusable for purposes of this study. The other two samples from AAA committeemen and IjBeyond this point, the work was done on the initiative of the author. §jSee Chapter II. cooperators' samples were combined and accepted as the best available information relevant to the use made of alternative livestock market outlets by Michigan farmers as a.whole. 6, County data from the 1515 questionnaires in the combined samples were sorted according to livestock marketing areas and a separ— ate tabulation made. 7. Statistical tables and graphic illustrations were constructed showing the utilization of the seven alternative types of market outlets for each market class of each species of livestock in the geOgraphic areas considered. 8. Findings of the study which were found to have some degree of statistical validity were then described and subjected to econ— omic analysis and interpretation in the textual preparation of this manuscript. H§§_2£_ngmg, The subsequent list of terms will be used in light of the following qualifications in all subsequent portions of this thesis?! 1. The designation terminal markets includes market outlets which the farmers answering the mail questionnaires considered to be "terminal public markets" to which they consigned livestock di- rectly through commission firms. In practice this refers mainly to the terminal stockyards in Detroit, Chicago, and Buffalo. 2. The term concentration yards includes market outlets which the farmers answering the mail questionnaires considered to be "con- ajA.primary objective of defining these terms at this point is to derive short concise names for the seven alternative types of markets on which inquiries in the questionnaires are based, With a view to brevity and convenience in discussion, the author uses these shorter terms in the same sense as the more extended, self-explaining captions employed in the questionnaire. See Appendix A for copy of the farm schedule mailed to farmers. 8. centration yards or local markets" and normally thought of as markets in continuous or near continuous daily Operation in anti- cipation of orders direct from local or terminal packers. The term packigg plants includes market outlets considered by the farmers replying to be "packing plants“ and presumably includes direct sales to both local and terminal packers. The term dealers, includes market outlets which the responding farmers considered to be "dealers or truck buyers." Presumably this includes individuals or firms buying livestock direct from farmers with a view to profit from resale at various points not predetermined. The term lgggl cooperatives applies to local cooperative live- stock marketing associations through which farmers shipped their livestock by rail or truck to the COOperatively owned Michigan Livestock Exchange or the Detroit terminal market. The term auction includes initial market outlets which the re- spondents considered to be "auctions or sale barns." Presumably, this includes private or possibly c00perative markets Operating on definitely scheduled days at which livestock is sold to the highest bidder. The term farmers, as used in this study in reference to a type of initial market, includes local buyers which the respondents considered to be "farmers or others." In addition to farmer- buyers, the term may include local butchers, hucksters, retailers, and other initial market outlets not covered by the above mention- ed six classifications. The term local assembling markets denotes those local markets which function in the marketing of slaughter livestock to bring widely scattered local production together for sorting, grading, and concentrating into efficient shipping or selling lots. The term includes concentration yards, dealers, local cooperatives, and auctions as defined above. 9. The term slaughter marke§_denotes these markets on which buyers purchase slaughter livestock with the intention of direct slaugh- tering. These outlets are represented mainly by packing plants and by local butchers (included under "farmers and others"). 10. The term lgggl clearing point markets denotes those local markets acting to facilitate the movement of market classes of producer livestock from farmers wishing to sell to those wishing to buy. Concentration yards, dealers, and auctions perform this function. ll. The phrase terminal clearing point markets denotes terminal mar- kets and local COOperatives shipping to terminals which act to facilitate the exchange of market classes of producer livestock, on an inter-area and interstate basis. .Eunctional gnalysis 2f Initial Livestock Market Outlets. The analy- sis of market utilization used by the author in discussing the movements of livestock from farm to initial markets is based on the function per~ formed by the markets under consideration. As function performed by given markets varies between slaughter and producer classes of market livestock, it is necessary to set up two functional analyses. For the slaughter class of each species, including veal in the case of cattle, initial markets may perform three functions which are: (1) t0 Provide a terminal market, (2) to perform an assembling function, ‘ lQ/Markets performing this function are included in the term local Eégembling markets as defined above. r _1_1_/ and (3) to buy animals for direct slaughter. The need for the first function arises from the concentration of large packing plants at points where the surplus slaughter livestock Of a region can be shipped for packing. At these points large numbers Of livestock are concentrated making it possible for the large packing plants at these markets to operate on a sufficiently large scale to secure econ- omical Operations Of their plants.l§/ Market outlets performing the second function are concentration yards, dealers, local cooperatives and auctions. These local assembling markets act as intermediaries between the farmers selling the slaughter livestock and those wishing to buy. Their overall function is to bring widely scattered small quantities of slaughter livestock together in such numbers as can be economically sorted, graded, and shipped. To the in— dividual farmer who has only an insignificant amount of livestock for sale at one time it is often cheaper and much more convenient to patron— ize these local assemblying markets than to attempt to ship or deliver his animals directly to the terminal market. The third function, Of providing direct contact between producer and processor, is afforded by such outlets as direct sales by producers to packing plants, and tO local butchers (included under "farmers and others"). A different analysis applies to markets handling market classes Of li/Markets performing this function are included in the term local slaughter marketg as defined above. ‘lg/There is some feeling that the importance Of this function has overemphasized the advantages of concentration Of packing facilities at the terminals and that decentralization of the industry would result in economies Of transportation. producer livestock such as (l) stockers or feeders and (2) breeding ani- mals. The ultimate Object of all such trade in producer livestock is the transfer Of these animals from farms with surpluses to sell to other farms where they are wanted for fattening or finishing or for building up herds. This movement can also be classified into three smaller move— ments: (1) farm to farm movements as when farmers buy and sell between themselves; (2) movements to the local clearing points which are con- centration yards and auctions where buyers and sellers Of these producer classes are brought together} (3) terminal clearing point markets where regional surpluses Of the producer classes are cleared through commission firms between farmers wishing to sell and those wishing to buy. It should be added that terminal clearing point markets are probably more important as a secondary market outlet than as an initial market outlet. 1 “1/The secondary sales at the local clearing point are not neces- sarily to farmers; dealers and inter-area scalpers may bring together and barter the animals among themselves, but eventually the animals come into the hands Of farmers. 10 fi\-I\—*-‘. Irv ‘U.¢Jhu ‘5 ca- i‘ "'\‘."1"7\r-r _ ‘ In- ~1-TTf-v - \qw. «vv U- 1 I \. . . 'ng «IA \J v, ‘ —LIV 15m. «a O: .'-..‘"‘3 unis.“ it. D A ~~1 "-1-? wf‘fl T11 '1' :4. -?v.,r1-rr~\v o-habx'.» -LV'AL-J ....\.nfs~\.‘h.~$y-u I .V‘ 7 . ‘ “‘7' ‘1' ‘ .+ ’- .,‘ . fi.' rs r : F . -1' " - L'. ‘ AS lfl»1le' b; one title, this Cu‘ ter is diiiceu into tuo sections: I. ‘ h ‘_ _o r‘ fi 0 _ A“ O ‘1 ~_ "I r- _’ I — 1 o o a :1 ‘H 1" . I- r V‘ (i, a section sealing Wlbfl the gto:rich1c susa1v1sion Oi the data, an' "‘ '-. w ' z...” c ,- i ,. °- .- , -.,.1.,-.° 1 an... l .‘,.i.- (r) a section COASlStiJ of a athtl“thJl 51.x; tic“ Ol tie sum-ls data. are s follo'inp a rather conventian l clfssificaticn of the state accord— in“ to general “0 r' 11c and economic avers. Tficse wre:s are as f:i‘ous: are; ], Siutharn, xii-3‘: consi~ts of the 13' ‘13:- 1‘1[1 “nth on" the Cit,"- Xdikegon line; nrw' 3, kartiern, u7ic“ FCLSlibC of t“ t rt of the Le er Peninsula lying north of the Buy City~fiuakegcn line, rid Area f, the Upucr :en 17-. .See Figure l for the cc tn: 1 cemarcation UctbPCH *reiz l and 9 13516“. has been made to coinci’te with "F‘ii‘" 5“” f” 1""l--_d-t:'”~‘- “on live). Factors which snould roneil" Le considered in the delimitatian of inclvde the availability of tritr TO‘tC filon fuel— . e U) livestock nrrfeting qre: lities, lOC"tl0n of HCI‘:Ot outlet 5, type of : ruin: freas, and histrinuticn N +1x . v- " - _- - ~ .w . '.‘ -~ fiv-HI‘ r.-" 1 ~. “ . -‘ - -‘ '2 " '5 ‘ ‘1 . "‘ . L + . »- " OI ...€3 llt‘tStOCw- {O ul._;tlc.1, I_L:?;,,L,u,.,. _‘-.~: 13:21; ",il‘thxlle-l‘ fltilnlxlclon Cull- ' L“; - ' ' . ' . " .. ...",- ‘ ‘~ ‘- ‘ ‘ , ‘- . . - stlti.ee a cl_581licntian or a sa.~le h-lCU ».u '_r ,t’ neer g'lner ;, the ‘ . L” ‘\ 1' ‘ “ - ‘-—~ . I. \ :‘L‘ *‘fl "«’ xv . -. '1\' . “. -:‘ L‘ ‘ ‘ sua11.f OI that data anc-tne r-lect o. excessive bhufl vial n of tap data fir} n "\ - n 1 *F‘ r vf-h w - ~1 «Lr‘ / a.“ rqr' ~p\" ‘5 \ f‘l 'w ,fic- ‘ ‘— I‘hr) ‘ ‘3‘ ‘ ‘P‘ 4 w» eCLt.-l".-C ’ O- St | l" ‘ICGI‘O. (:5 \.-_C lgcllt ‘ 1 u :30 “we. L0 be C3.LLL'\I.C-~-‘M. "';":‘f\ “ \~ 11 vn.‘ ~‘V‘FK+.-‘ . \."\, "'.""\1‘ r I\ . 1.1'trj -":.~ ‘l'..~:.,.I‘Cl;CEg ll ..i' lisfulfa LJ-.-Lllul.l.ls I‘L- (ENJLI ‘-\... ,,.L\.-. . "““(‘_V‘|t‘ ‘, . fly 1 n {A —‘-;'N v "~' '1 L‘FLA»- L‘A... eL'Dn-J‘n‘h L—I‘V :3.“ U; I.-. -- ll O) 10. 11. 12 13. 11+. 16- 1? Area Irate 15. TYPE or FARMING 11.113115 IN MICHIGAN ? -;.tura1 Line Basis ' ' mm . *1 - ”wwwmm ‘ . 'RON—‘L--—-J ' ' L "FT—- UPP B 17 PE 1‘" ‘ .I R”, L 'CH/PPIEHA L "1 ' 'TO (.4- ___L_| ACKIIDAE- I _ ‘ A’PMT Corn and Livestock Small Grains and Livestock Southwestern Friit and Truck Crops Ebfltmglhnygrdfrmk Crops Dairy arui Gcniirfil F511 in; Ibiry and Cgsh Craps Dairy, Eigr, xnd_E}UOCi l CrCWs o U.;.7A'Arh:1>'C9 ,Mrcw n ‘1( rascal}. ’- - 1131c ‘ c~+~ H w H (A (3 d a q 1 Q. f'iO-’;7C/ILH GA'IH’IOI' ‘ FR; ,51 TLINTCN ‘ - ‘7“ [lNR 1X“ " {I RBI] L—~ I" tble, :tJLIAiJJ ’ 7 1“ ‘2 u I r ‘ _luI‘|H—EB ! Sufficin. ~ 4" i ~° mm mm m: L t 1 ' W S} L 01" tilel n ‘J 0.11%: 14:17.1 , “raw iwomv ',z.- Vowswl Dai ry- and " , IAN/ULO‘C/‘nuv’mt/ . A1A Noi' ' IUfifiI—iBR/wa ILLSWNR ’ l " ‘ 1 C I . c ’1‘. 11. Livestock Survey Mien: and Types of rerun; Areas in Michigan (Ben nap prepared by ram Magellan Department, Michigan State 6011‘), .1. .‘n' on thistasis could hardly be avoided-if.any breakdown was to be made- regardless of making the number of observations too small in northern areas. This classification left about 85 per cent of the livestock in area 1, about 1% per cent in area 2, and about 1 per cent in area 3. The possibility of breaking down the data in area 1 so as to differentiate between the feeding area in the Thumb, the corn and feeding area in southern cornbelt counties, the southwest fruit belt, and the central generalized farm area was discussed with livestodk marketing specialists in the De- partment of Economics at Michigan State College. The principal considera- tion deterring such a further breakdown was the fact that such subdivision of the data would limit the expected accuracy of the percentages sold to the alternative markets to such an extent as to render the data for the very important southern area as poor in statistical quality as the data for the relatively unimportant areas 1 and 2. The fact that sales per farm are larger in the southern area further accentuates the statistical danger of excessive subdivision of data. The pertinent economic and geographic characteristics of these three areas are summarised in the following paragraphs. Area 1: Southern Livestock Area. The region, as a whole, may be characterized as fertile relative to the remainder of the state, well situated in regard to the meat consuming centers of Michigan and the east- ern United States, well served by rail and trucking facilities, and pro- ductive of concentrated feed-stuffs for livestOCk fattening. Cattle and lambs fattened in the southern tier of counties are often moved in from western sources by farmers to utilize their abundant corn supplies. In the Thumb area the bulk of the feeder cattle are of local or north central Michigan origin. 13 Farmers in this large heterogeneous area marketed 77 per cent of the cattle and calves, 89 per cent of the hogs and pigs, and 85 per cent of the sheep and lambs sold off farms in Michigan, 1939.;/ Its heterogen- eity is attested by the following list of farming-type areas as distin— guished and delimited by the Farm Management Department of Michigan State College.g/ (1) corn and livestock, (2) small grains and livestock, (3) southwestern fruit and truck crops, (h) poultry, dairy, and truck crops, (5) dairy and general farming, (6) dairy and cash crops, (7) dairy, hog, and special crops, and (8) beans, beets, and dairy. (See Figure 1.) Initial market outlets in this major area include terminal packing plants at Detroit which serve Ohio and Indiana as well as Michigan, in- terior packing plants at Grand Rapids, Bay City, and other points, con- centration yards such as the one at St. Johns, and numerous auctions, dealers, local c00peratives, local butchers and farmers. Within the area lie such heavily pOpulated manufacturing centers as Detroit, Grand Rapids, Flint, Saginaw, Bay City, and Lansing whose meat consumption demands are only partially supplied by the area or even by the state as a whole. Incoming shipments of finished livestock, concen— trated feed, and feeder livestock offset this discrepancy. Shipments are also made from border counties in area 1 to such out—of-state markets as Toledo, Buffalo, Cincinnati, Ft. Wayne, and Chicago. However, in the writer‘s Opinion the out-of—state shipments of livestock and meat products do not offset the combined weight of in-state shipments of fat and feeder cattle, feedstuffs, and meat products. Further characteristics of this 1 ‘/United States Census of.Agriculture, 1930. g/E. B. Hill, "Types of Farming in Michigan," Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station, Special Bulletin 206 (Rev., 1939). 1h area are presented in subsequent chapters and the present characteriza— tion should be considered only a rather general background of livestock production and marketing in this area. Area 2: Northern Livestock Area. As a whole, area 2 is a thinly populated, relatively infertile cut-over forest region largely given over to provision of recreational facilities to tourists and hunters who enjoy the scenic values of the landscape as well as the resources of wild life. The type—of—farming areas which have been delimited within this region include (See Fig. l): (9) cattle, sheep, and forage; (10) central potato and dairy; (ll) northern fruit and dairy; (12) northern potato and dairy; (13) general, selfesufficing and part-time; (1h) cattle, potatoes, and self—sufficing. Soils and climate in area 2 are generally unfavorable to the produc- tion of feed grains, and shipping expenses make it uneconomical to ship in feeds and then ship the finished animals south to large consuming centers; hence, the region is at a comparative disadvantage in the production of fat stock. A few stockers are shipped in from western ranges to utilize the sum- mer grasses. The stocker cattle and sheep are handled primarily by a few large rancher dealers who find it more economical to sell the acclimated livestock to southern or small scattered local feeders than to transport feedstuffs north. Thus western stockers and native cattle provide a medium of commercial utilization of the summer grasses of this region. Few hogs are raised except for local slaughter purposes. With the exception of the summer tourist trade, area 2 does not have heavy meat consumption demands within its bounds. Traverse City, Manistee, and a few other towns of similar size are the main year around consuming NH .44 -.-| ‘i Q. o 3' p- » a 85 I‘ Q 4“. no a 3» .1 15 centers. Area 3: Upper Peninsula Livestock Area. About one-half of the area of the Upper Peninsula has been set off in natural and state forests. This sparsely papulated region has been divided by the Farm Management ' Department into three types of farming areas as follows: (15) cattle, hay, and spring grains; (l6) dairy and potatoes; and (17) potatoes, dairy and part-time. (See Fig. 1.) Commercial farms are to be found mainly in Chippewa county at the eastern end, Menominee county in the southern— most extremity, and in scattered localities elsewhere. Compared to the Lower Peninsula area, area 3 is relatively insigni- ficant in relation to livestock marketings, as only h per cent of the cattle and calves, l per cent of the hogs and pigs, and a negligible pro- portion of the sheep and lambs reported sold in Michigan in 1939 were marketed from farms in this region. The tourist trade, the iron and cqpper mining industry, and lumber- ing are the basis for meat consumption demands found in this area. Although there are only a few relatively small sized consuming centers in the area, it does not produce its requirement of livestock. This discrepancy is off— set by inshipment of meat products of pork and beef. Despite this, some livestock do more out of the area to areas where farmers have access to feedstuffs. A few finished sheep move out as there is a lack of local demand for mutton. Initial market outlets in this area function primarily to assemble the sparse livestoCk production for local slaughter and occasionally for shipments to southern markets. The major livestock markets serving this area are at Green Bay, Wisconsin, and Menominee, Ironwood, and.Houghton, dichigan. The area is ouite distant from the terminal markets at Detroit if —~‘ ' W‘ 16 and Chicago and ouantities large enough to make long distant shipping be economical are rarely produced; as a result little use is made of term- inal markets. Concentration yards and auctions are seemingly out of place in the Upper Peninsula as not enough livestock is produced to provide for an ample business; auctions are nonexistent and it is doubtful if any true concentration yards are in Operation. Dealers are numerous relative to the volume Of business which is probably explained by the fact that some of them act as hucksters: also they do not have to compete With auctions and concentration markets and packing plants. Statistical Reliability of he Data Tabulation of the data on which this study is based revealed the per- centages Of each species Of livestock sold to the various alternative market outlets by 1515 farm Operators returning mail questionnaires. Because all conclusions, originating solely with the sample data, as to the relative importance of the alternative market outlets are based on these percen- tages, the ouestion immediately arises as to whether the samples indicate the actual percentages that existed in the populations they purport to represent. It is the purpose of this section to attempt an answer to this question so that conclusions based on the sample percentages may be properly qualified. In order to determine how representative the sample percentages are, an attempt was made to ascertain how nearly the sample is representative of the important determinants of these percentages. The l9hO United States Census of Agriculture furnishes data as to the distribution by counties of each species Of livestOCk, as well as the average number sold per farm 17 reporting sales during 1939. These two factors are revealed, in later portions of this study, to be major determinants of percentages of each species sold through the various alternative markets. Succeeding portions of this chapter indicate the degree of similarity between the 1515 sample farms, with respect to geographic distribution and number sold per farm in 1939, and all the farms from which the sample was taken. On the basis Of the later demonstrated relationships between these two factors and the percent ges sold through the alternative markets, knowledge as to the similarity between sampled farms and the universe Of farms from which the sample is drawn permits proper qualifications of con- clusions based on the sample percentages. Geographic Rgpresentativeness. The percentage distribution of live- stock sold from the 1515 sampled farms in 19h0 is compared, by areas, with the percentage distribution Of livestock sold from all Michigan farms in 1939 in Table 1 . TABIJI l. PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF LIVESTOCK SALES.AS REPORTED BY THE CENSUS AND BY 1515 COMBINED SAMPLE FARMS, BY LIVESTOCK AREAS, MICHIGAN Cattle Hogs Sheep Source and.Area’ and and and Calves Pigs Lambs 1515 sample farms, 19MO Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent Area 1 . ............... . 6 SO 86 Area 2 . ................ 23 17 13 Area 3 . ............... . lO 3 1 Michigan ............... 100 100 100 All farms, U.S. Census, 1939 Area 1 . ............ .... 77 89 85 Area 2 . ................ 19 10 in Area 3 .... ............. 2 l 1 Michigan .............. i 100 100 100 Source: questionnaires. 19MO United States Census of Agriculture and.1515 mail 18 It appears from the above table that the prOportion Of cattle and hogs to all livestock reported sold in 19NO from sampled farms in area 1 was smaller than that indicated by the Census for all farms reporting live- stock sales in 1939. In view of the great differences which exist in the relative importance of the market outlets between areas, this area biasl/ must be kept in mind when dealing with percentages derived from the sample and supposedly applying to all farms in the state. Thus, if sample farms in area 1 report a considerably larger prOportion of their cattle sold to terminal markets than in other areas, the sample for the state would show too small a percentage sold to this outlet because area 1 would be, in a sense, underweighted in the state figures. Qualifications such as the above proved to be necessary at numerous points in subsequent chapters. Size and Representativeness Of Sample, as to Volume of Farm Marketings. Two qualities of a near perfect sample of Michigan farmers selling live- stock for purposes Of this study would be: (1) that the average number sold per farm be identical in the sample and in the entire group of farms from which the sample is drawn; (2) that the number of farms in the sample be large enough to insure a high probability Of the percentages derived from the sample having a standard error small enough to be usable. The degree to which the present sample approaches these ideals, a factor great- ly affecting the validity of the economic conclusions, is examined in this section. On the basis Of relationships found to exist between size of farm livestock operations, as indicated by number Of each species sold per farm per year, and the percentages sold through alternative market outlets, it z/Assuming no major shifts in the marketing pattern from 1939 to l9hO, this area bias exists in the sample data. 19 was decided that samples whose average number of livestock sold per farm per year deviated from the census average by three or more head in the case of cattle and calves'or six head in the case of hogs and pigs, or ten head in the case of sheep and lambs would not be likely to give accurate percentages of each species sold through alternative market outlets. Table 2 shows how the average number of each species sold per farm per year varies between the reports of (l) the census, (2) the two inde- pendent samples, and (3) the combination of the two independent samples. One sample consists of the 69h usable questionnaires returned in answer to letters sent to all Agricultural Adjustment Administration committeemen/ and the other sample consists of the 820 usable questionnaires returned in answer to letters sent to every twentieth AAA c00perator. One sample gathered by a field representative is omitted from this table and the study, as the deviations of its averages from the Census averages were far too great, in view of the statement in the preceding paragraph. Statistically, one of the most important characteristics of the table is the fact that all but two of the deviations of the sample aver— ages fall above the census average, whereas in random sampling an equal number would normally be expected to fall on each side. This bias is due to: (l) the fact that in one case only AAA committeemen were sampled and in the other case only AAA c00perators were sampled; (2) the selectivity of responses to mail questionnaires; (3) error conditioned by size of sample in relation to variance; and (h) possible errors in the calculation and recording of Census and sample data. From the standpoint of the economic analyst, these deviations in the average are significant to the extent that they increase the eXpected error in the sample percentages of each 20 TABLE 2. AVERAGE NUMBER or LIVESTOCK SOLD PER FARM REPORTING SALES IN 19uo CENSUS AND IN SAMPLE AAA AAA Species and Area Census Committeemen Cooperator Combined 1939 Sample Sample Sample 19u0 19u0 19uo Number Number Numbeg. Number Cattle and calves .Area 1 ...... 6.78 12.h8 9.76 11.18 Area 2 ...... 5.hh 8.28 7.66 7.98 Area 3 ...... n.31 7.30 11.35 9.32 Michigan .... 6.3M 10.81 9.21 10.00 Hogs and Pigs Area 1 . ..... 17.u6 2h.96 20.67 22.87 Area 2 ...... 8.90 12.65 10.3h 11.79 Area 3 ...... 9.11 18.59 7.12 7.71 Michigan .... 15.81 20.85 16.93 17.11 Sheep and lambs Area 1 ...... 36.82 60.30 u7.18 55.07 Area 2 ...... 32.6u 36.29 22.50 31.0u Area 3 ...... 17.n7 l ‘l/ 1/ Michigan .... 35.95 58.25 u3.0u 52.65 Source: questionnaires. United States Census of Agriculture, 19 J), 1/ Sample too small for calculations to be significant. species sold through the alternative market outlets. and 1515 mail It will be observed that the bias is greatest in the case of the committeemen sample--great 'enough to raise a question as to the advisability of combining the two samples rather than rejecting the committeemen sample and using only the The 't' test was applied to the differences between c00perator sample. the averages of the two samples. (See Table 3 .) Significant differ- ences were found to exist only in the cases of hogs and pigs, area 3, and sheep and lambs, all areas. Reference to Table «4 will indicate that the size of sample for the areas for which significant differences were found.to exist is also too small to insure accurate percentages; 21 hence, the significant differences were ignored and the samples combined as the best available data. TABIJ: 3. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SAMPLE MEANS AND BETWEEN COMBINED SAMPLE MEANS AND THE CENSUS MEANS . Difference between Difference between Species and.Area mean of committeemen combined sample means and member sample and census means Number Number Cattle and calves Area 1 .. ........ ... 2.72 l/ h.h0 Area 2 ............. .62 1] 2.5M Area 3 14.05 5.01 Michigan ........... _ 1.60 1/ 3.66 Hogs and pigs Area 1 .... ........ . ”.29 1/ 5.h1 Area 2 .. .......... . 2.31 2.89 Area 3 .......... _1_/ 11.h7 1.111 Michigan .. ......... 3.89 1.30 Sheep and lambs Areal............. _1_/13.12 18.25 Area 2 . ........... . y 13.79 1.61 Area 3 ............. 2/ 2/ Michigan ........ _1_/ 15.20 16.69 Source: United States Census of Agriculture and 1515 mail cuestionnaires. l/Significantly different, that is, differences such as these, in relation to size of the sample and variance as to number of each species sold per farm per year, would normally be expected to occur between two random samples or one random sample and a census average from the same universe less than 10 times out of 1000 sample tries. 2/The sample is too small for calculation to be significant. Application of the 't' test to differences betWeen the average of the combined sample and the census indicated the difference to be larger in areas 1, 2, and for the state in the case of cattle and for area 1 in the case of hogs than would normally occur in the 10 poorest random samples out of 1000. 22 Figures 2.3 , and4 , present a comparison of the distribution of farms in the sample according to average number of each species sold per year/with an unsealed approximation of the probable distribution of all farms in the state. In these figures are two dotted vertical lines rep— resenting average number of each species sold per farm per year in the combined sample and in the census. It is largely on the basis of the re- lationship between these two lines and the skewness of the distribution that the free—hand lines were drawn. Obviously, if the census average is considerably smaller than the sample average, as in the case of cattle, the census or p0pulation would have more farms, relative to the sample, with smaller average sales per year. From these charts it is evident that the greatest bias exists in the sheep and lamb and the cattle and calf data. Before summarizing the qualifications necessary in utilizing the data on which this study is based some attention should be given to the signifi- cance of percentage differences and the size of random sample needed to make a sample percentage significant. The following question illustrates the meaning of significance as used in this instance: are differences in the percentage utilization of a given market outlet in two different areas the result of actual differences in the two areas or are they just the fluctuations normally expected from sampling? By calculating the standard error, it can be determined whether or not a difference found is due to random sampling from one universe. Thus, the answer to the above question would be relatively simple if the sample had been gathered by random methods. The quandary of this study arises when it is realized that the samples studied are biased and not selected at random and that sample averages of a 00”.- 00m; come- 00:., weswwdcowpmmnd Hams mama wmohzom m8“ pa nexus unmah can on unannouu mama» ooa do aapwuawaa scan on Haoauowu an. .aanoa can» nausea snoama: a sham sum eaom_nwpasz : a: .n as we ox -m an ma, m: o Om #w w... NT...§W1M ...fimlzvlw! .T. Jill‘s): C.|... if a _b a. _ 0.0 slimmHHlkzluHHHu .Muw rllrllzhwx. . : ~ I / _ . /. . _ :Is I . I. _ _ x . _ _ J _ 100M r _ _ .. _ a I... . ~ . _ “ casewuaafixouapm coacumqa .n . -oom . namm mung Eonm .ll. use: menu a a“ muggy ma V _ ~ magic .3me0.& ago: nodacdfiofl . _ W ansfiwwn on» we epwuauaowmnnmh magma: . _ _:l a. whoa panama a ton mwpcanaw mpufio _ _ _ u . ....o w _ room m. occaupnwnuwao canamm atop» say u “m _ g .1 sham non. _L m 00 . r3 WWMW¢>ta . s mamamw _ m we 39. . y .m _ gmh 00.: 1. . u m m. _ damn i s .o>¢ canaoo AWN4 CFCF . . a I a h oozma savanna: waaaou mmma o» cmuepeoo Ame . non caoo access on wcucnooom uaou mopawo can cauamo 3.3.3.3." mega.“ 2mm” monogsfluama m van—mum \s .l I‘lkl ~‘ 14‘lltlll ‘lllililiul1i'.l 1ll.||| .IIIA waswumsoWuwwa mez mHmH C I «cokfiva (J sewed sang anemia mamadnsouc cofiunpanuawn been on Haoweocspafi ufi means a _ mwwh e. o 1. n . Shah hmm CHOW LmDEdz 4 Lu u acmchdyw mkauKWo end on can ans can on“ «OOH ow as as on as a . .nwvvto » ad. at trim, t a. . Win w4llr.. ..mmmmnwuununuwtivrm1. car, 0m oL OH O rEIIIVFquiitifiilk _ _ (._ glib ...: 4M? _ _ _ ml/l . _ 00H- M 3 sea com- _ “com .ncofiucewxoamaw umequd Gama «mam m ma ufinuv mamsww max» Beam wacfieou haomnoum v.26». aofimapouoa K panama on» mo cpwumpnmwoaama zanmm: m whoa maaemm m Bog wwueofinaw c>kno a. con. - n n 0 V .. < U0 manganfiuwwu camera meogm autism?“ 73% we _ .350 m. _mmma w 00:. and...“ mom 32. .on H ompd tog em oaascm N on? m... .3 gz%éis -Eézie:3t;4.i,. Ir£.:;,;mvxw ; . . OOm \IJOQm . .CJmH .eeuaaoar .mamawo mama on carapace hawh.kmm vaom access 0» mcwchooom caom wmfln new mac: Mawuponcp memM wow mo Cowuspwkawwm .IIAWIVazkwm 25 .mma mmufimmnowummud “an: mama uuokaow m~ mnwupmv hasnnoun case: a «weasnom agenda an» Mnuuaomounmn hammon whoa nausea m We: wmumowuua apnea anewudnwhuuuu mamas» muons sauMOumwm ooa . oma £32“ an: unchon hampcupooa sowusnwuumwo Base 0» Hmouuuaunau aw moMcs assay can 0» mwmnbcxw oamuuum - such non pace uwaasz o . on ..a DNA 0“ cm lupw on N o o ;z-?-iii-:trlnlllnllnllxlslll 55L.zce;anHmnhfitxwzfvltm in n _ o ..... Lima... _ ..a .. . _ I ..H w _llyi _ mm _ . ,1 .mm . .. om ,Om .Aaowumaauoamna evacuees .uaaa a ooum a a“ nanny vanaaw A» soak .1 .fl Eutuiodaa smaug Jo Jaqmng L a”. “do" . a / 5h flfimfiflo / a x-.. .mfi 18 eon oo>< OHQBQw A acme oozmn 53.30“: .25qu mmma 3 02363 . «. oufith use» you anon honeys on magnaooom vaoa noonm unuuhonuu magma mmm mo nowuapuuuuwn 26 number of each specie sold per year-—a factor greatly affecting the utilization of the markets audiede-deviate so much from the census aver~ ages that it is highly improbable in most cases that the samples under consideration can be compared with a random sample. If it cannot be as- sumed that the samples studied are random the formula for standard error is not applicable as it is based on that assumption; thus, it cannot be determined statistically whether the sample difference in percentages are true differences or are probably due to normal fluctuations in random smples. This being the case the standard error formula does not indicate the probable error of the sample percentage in relation to the correspond- ing true percentage in the purported population; it indicates, instead, the probable error of the sample percentage in relation to the corresppnd- ing percentage 13 the biased population from which the sample was drawn. Thus, it is futile to calculate the standard errors of percentages de- rived from this sample as the results would only be a measure of error from an erroneous parent population. In lieu of this calculation the author presents Table 4. which is derived from a modification of the standard error formula. This table shows the size of sample needed to secure given degrees of accuracy in a series of sample.percentages, thus, indicating roughly the adequacy of present sample sizes. The table indicates whether or not a sample is large enough to give stated degrees of accuracy to a given series of percentages in relation to the same percentage in whatever parent pOpulation it does represent: it does not indicate Whether or not a sample represents its purported parent pOpulation or whether or not there is a significant difference between two percentages. Use of this table in connection with this study will prevent attempts to ascribe im— 27 TABLE IV SIZE OF SAMPLE NEEDED TO SECURE GIVEN DEPREES OF ACCURACY IN SAMPLE PERCENTAGES l] Precision Needed in 950 Percentage Concerned Out Of 1000 Samples Within 2 Per Cent Within 10 Per Cent (Per Cent) Number of Farms or Number of Farms or Units Required in Units Required in Sample Sample 5 236 10 the 15 636 2b 20 798 25 936 36 3o 1ou8 35 1136 MM no 1198 M5 1236 us 50 12h8 55 1236 us 60 1198 65 1136 ug 70 ions 75 936 36 80 79f 85 6‘6 2h 90 mg 95 236 llNumber of farm or units required in sample is calculated from the fol- lowing formula: n .. P1Q1+P2Q2 2 (bpl ‘ P2 t For example, it is desired to know how large a random sample must be taken to insure 95 random samples having a stated degree of precision, say within 2 per cent, out of every 100 random samples for a given component part making up 15 per cent of the parent population. percentage concerned plus permissible error in per cent (15 + 2 : 17). P1 = EXpress in decimals .17 0.1:1'p1: 08} p9 3 percentage concerned minus permissible error in per cent (15 - 2 Z 13). Express in decimals .13 q2=1-p2=087 t = the abscissa of the ordinate of normal curve at the 5 per cent point = 2 28 portance to percentages derived from samples too small to be indicative of their purported parent pOpulation, whether or not the sample is biased; use of the table will not, however, prevent attempts to ascribe importance to percentages derived from samples of adeouate size but too biased to be usable. l/(Continued from page 27) Then substituting in the formula n = .1] ' .83 + .13 ' .81 ~131- .17 3‘ ( 2 n : ogfihg = 636 (.oh) 636 then becomes the size of sample needed when sampling a universe concerning a component part eoualling 15 per cent and when the desired precision is 2 per cent in either direction in 95 out of 100 samples. The size of samples needed for a series of percentages at 2 and 10 per- centages of error are given in the table. Derivation of (1) n : P1q1 ' Psqe 9 Pl ' P2 t from (2) t : pl ‘ p2 ¥ plql p202 n1 1 n2 (3) t P191 . P2q2 = p1 - p2 n1 n2 2 (u) p1‘11 ‘ Psqe = p1 + p2 n t (5) n = PlQ1 4 peqa P1 - P2 t 2 29 Results of the preceding statistical analyses and evaluation of the sample data are summarized in Table5 , which in itself constitutes a sum- mary of the statistical evaluation of each sample. Confidence to be placed in the sample data varies considerably between samples. Hence, generali- zation of value in regard to confidence cannot be made except as follows: variation as to the quality of the data is so great from area to area and between species that an understanding of these differences is almost a prerequisite to sound use of the percentage data derived from these samples. .esamb mo mmwmecoonem mapemm on» mMmE on camp 09 ewes mcofipmofimfiamsC mcfidmoesa page Hamam om madame mm mm» one amped ow ma wean ceases esp pap .mqfiasemm Soc lawn scum pafimon dadoo mapsmm man» page mapmnonm ma pH Ho.m m m.mm oma ....m mou< .oufie cw haadw pmmx mum wcoHpeOwuwHMSU mbopm map mmwacd .epmsdoom humb memmpceosem manamm 0:» made on apnoea emama pom ma eacamm mo muam exp dam .doummcomaoomd ma paom pepadc omwhm>m on we mean pecans epmaepoe age .mqfiacemm 606 news acne enemas eases mapsem man» page mapeposesn ma pH :m.m m mooo.o Hem ....m mesa .chE Q“ pmex ma we“: exp m“ canned mommpceoeem maeemm axes on ammoqe emsma ma macemm one pap .pepmmcecaoosfi cam omsma evade m“ pace henesn on we mean cases: was .mcfiacamm Sou uses gone panama canoe maasww was» seen mflpenosnsa ma pH o:.: m moo.o amp ....H mesa .OHQMmS evade mommpceosem esp dexea msgp .oaom memes: on we mean demand an an dmpmwcepaoo ma soapdp Iappmfic encampmoem 809% mean deceased 4 .mcfiapamm Sod A .3 u uses acne panama easoo mapsem man» page wapaposnea ma pH mm.m m m~.m aw use av mama ....nemaaoaa mobamo dam mappmo mspmmmo sepssa nonsdz mmmmmw senses mpafimmm doom defies nomadaflnmz mdmceo a“ seam hem caom _mmeapamm pepsogep pepfidz So amp oooa mamemm we \I pHHsSG ewmse>¢ aonm sea muoapmfi>eo cofipmanmom eaaamm mo dodpmdaw>m as am nodpdemom pnonmm cmppoapdm mmmpm>< wHaamw news nepmmnw mo eHmEm pcmnmm on mpHdmmm mamemm wcflmammd a“ mammwooom macapmofimHHde_ mo nowpwfibmq Append dmuoedxm we on“ deunoapdm HnDBm mHmB ho mfimOAfiDm.m0h «Eda mqmzmm nfiszEoo mme ho NBHAHdeHmm 92¢ N04QOHQ<_WO ZOHB¢DH45H b fiflmda «4:. 1.- n0 .e>opm mm oeHMmeSO ma ce>e .mcfimnme pcoo peg m unopm camp“; base mumpsucm hapmpoam one memmuceosem eHeEmm exp .mocmn "spades made m“ mHQEMw mo mafia esp paw musma ma Shem hep cHom pmpadc on we mean demand exp .mcwapamw Eopmmp Eosm emcee cfidos mHeEmm mafia ppm» mapmposfl ma pH .mbopm mm deflmwamdo Md cm>e .mcflmmms came peg m.pdopm manna; mace mumsdoom hapmpopn one memmpcmosem magnum exp .moceg "Edfieea afico w“ eacamm mo enwm exp and omnma w“ Shem sec pace sensed 0p we mean cameafi egg .mcflacamm Bowman Eomm pdooo canoe panama man» page mapmpopa ma pH mmmapsmmes mompdoom mo .pmeo pea OH hum Hamam om ma mapamw mo mNHm exp .mcofipmoflwfiamde mo .mpMdpmecpeg eacemw map a“ pepoesxe on mac .mmpMmp pgmfiflm m bade pug» .mp>etox "pummemm ma uaom panama on we mean pacems psmflam m haze cam mdwacemm Sow lama Eonm uadmmu dance eacemw wag» pump mapwpomp mw pH .pomnwep wasp cw dmfiuflamdm en padonm mmmmpcoouem eHQEmw can come: “HHQEw pecans ma .hobeeen .eaaamm mo euflm age vaom hopes: 0» we mean dhmemd map dam .pcmpsooaflcs ma .mcwacemm Eopqmn Scum panmes canoe maaemm was» peg» mapwpoea hnmb ma pH .ebopm esp mo moseSHmmfi one on we peHmeMSU m“ panama mewmpceosea easaem exp mas o» nmzocm magma ma maaamm on» p59 .mpmpmeoa ma poms append on we mean demand was Seam padmes dado: macamm was» gasp mapmposaaw ma pH .mcfiaasmm Eocene .oapmmd mafia: emmucoopem panama esp exfi. o» nmdoce amped mfi mapamm exp .me>eeo£ “soapSQfispmfid ofigmmnwoem Eopm mwfip m an we mspceoom passesom pan HHmEm ma paom umpEdc Op we mean charms age .MCHHQEmm Bop tame Scum padmes canoe panama man» page mapwnosm ma pH mm.ma mw.ma m~.~ H:.m om.H OH OH m.:H we .mmm H.o .mHm LL'\ Ham mmm mow ..H mead ..cmwdfiowfi mpamq cad .meflm ..m «mp4 ..m mend ..H seam ..eamaaoaa spam 4 pam whom .aufludu4u. 4.1. .- 7. 11nd 111 u 4.:1’1 J laugh-41H”! u‘ I 1.1“ 1.- unlll<¢1utn‘ 82 .wpadwmp doom pom mapdwwfieumm Edswxme mmp damp m an cofiqmeooom mwmaud hvdpm mag» aw mdowpmm pom mw mmmqsowcfip mo xoma nag» wasp mo wcowpoww mqfidmompm padmcoo mmo .maoprOHmwamsw may mo monmpyomsw ogp mm dopwpm mamaam pom wfi meEmm mo wuflm 0» mm mcofipmofimwamdo mo moadeMQH was mmwhm>d oaaawm mo moapmfibod “mummpm dmmmmgum on uHSQSm pH .umpmmgo npfia pwfififiawm pom Ma .powamp mm» .wmpmadoawo mum mdepmmogwm on» seas; Eopm mqowpmppmmpo mo nwngdn ms» moofiwmp pa ma mmwwpcmo Ipmg on» mo hodgdoow douoocxm on» m005fimp caom mmwao poxpme no pondpmmo mo mufim on ma soapmofimemeo .cofipw Ipmdfimmoo pmwmfi mmuw map 2“ mEpmm @mHQEmw asp Ham no dommp mmwmpcmonmn o» manna mapeam mo mnfim 0p mm mpnmsmpmum\m .Eoddmu pm nmxmp pod m“ handpopg wanemw mg» .CH nag» mmoa ma OOOH you pmpfifin MH .oooa you meEdn mo magma a“ wmmmmhmxm uwgp dam mmuaqfidno and mwfipfiafipmpopm mo oHQMp m a“ a: dmxooa mp can pa vmpmafioamo ma p mono + . mmamemmIb Hmamaam.\v m manfimm aw mama“ mo uwnfidz I mm H magawm cw mampfi mo umpesz u Hz an I ma u p nowpwfimmw dpgsgm u Mb m oaaswm mo qmmm u u H mamamm mo mamx u HE max: 9 mo soapmadoawo pom wHSEpoh\m .mommpcooumg mHnEwm as» on muflofiam> and magnoma 0p HHMEm 00p ma mapeww mo muwm was III OH IIII .w ..m dmp< .0pmn500w hapmnomMmh haso mmmwpqoonmm mamamm“ 0x68 0» mm Hawam om w“ mamewm mo mNHw ms» p59 .meHmHH Iwmn mu UHom umpEsd 0p mw amen Unwagfi 0&9 .mnuamsmm Eodddu Bonn havoc dado; mHQEdm mfigp nag» oHQMQOAQ ma pH‘ Hm.H OH H.10: _hm. ..m @094 CHAPTER III MOVEMENTS OF CATTLE AND CALVES TO INITIAL MARKETS Relative Importance of Market Classes of Cattle and Calves by Livestock Marketing_§reas As a.preliminary to discussion of the importance of alternative initial market outlets for each market class of cattle and calves, indications of the relative importance of each market class are present— ed at this point. For purposes of this study, all cattle reported sold off farms have been divided into four market classes: slaughter cattle, veal calves, stocker and feeder cattle, and dairy and breeding cattle. Slaughter gaittle, Data presented in Table 6 and FigureS indicate that for the state as a whole 35 per cent of all cattle sold are slaugh- ter cattle. Little variation is evident between areas in this respect. Sampled farms in area 1 and area 3 report slightly larger percentages of all cattle sold as slaughter cattle than is the case in area 2 or in the state-wide sample data. Egg; Calves. As in the case of slaughter cattle, approximately 35 per cent of the cattle and calves reported sold by the 1515 sampled farms were veal calves. While the prOportion was almost identical (36 per cent) for areas 1 and 3, veal calves accounted for barely 30 per cent of sales of all classes of cattle from sample farms in area 2. Inasmuch as area 2 contains proportionally fewer dairy cattle than areas 1 and 3, this situation is to be expected. Another factor accounting for this situation is to be found in the large amount of pasture land in area 2, mmbHso Hemp M oprmo HmpnmdsHm In .mnnflmqmoflpmmsv HHIE mHmH “condom mmama me.ma mm.ma mm.em om.mm mama mama asmamoan mama mm.ea me.aa mo.mm mo.mm oma oea m sans mama em.ma ma.am es.mm Ho.mm amm mas m mesa smam mm.ma ms.ma so.mm mm.mm ems mmm a sane mwpafib #500 now pamo amH mmmm.anm ammo Rom panama am Hum. mmHmm mappso pmwo hog 00H Op QHpuso Qprso udwphoqsn MdHhHmou Hmsmo mo>Hao was mnflmmaan ummmmm manmm magma mepno 90 names: was mnfiso can amMOOpm Mo ampedu no Manama mead .osma .eamamoaa I» mepmo H.309 no as mmxmd mmmHo memo £033 mwspcooamm aw mHnsH .mmmam mp mfiamm mHmH anw mmpmmama momeo was I‘ l’ Uflwflmuhn dam mud”: HEMOOHW Cam kcuwwh . llam damn“ I? remains lineal.) hwucwflaHm I . .. Isl-37.x»... Iiififih . m....... .I . .. ..I. IJHHIII, III -. hum P. Q 004 m~ I: .59: Emacs 3:: m Amaze. m 2. III. .I..._........_ .II aim. . ékgococ ..I... .rIquHII. a. w.” Awmmv H magma cox om w .mo .0: mou< aoau ouamxuaa nopHuo one oHauso Heme» mo Ad.woxme nnoHo some noun: nmwuauoOhom I a :ozmH aum«20w2 .ucouo hfi .weawu mHmH ohuwwh 37 which makes it feasible to bring grass-fed calves to feeder size and then sell them as such to farmers having access to feed supplies. Stocker'ang Feeder Cattle. The state-wide sample of 1515 farms indicates that about 17 per cent of all cattle sold in the state were feeder cattle. As would be expected from the above discussion of veal calves, farmers in area 2 sold more of their cattle as feeder cattle than in other areas of the state. M as. Breeding Cgttl . Data from the 1515 sampled farms indi- cate that about 13 per cent of the cattle sold in the state are dairy or breeding cattle. The northern areas 2 and 3 showed a larger prOportion sold as producer cattle proportionally than indicated for area l or for the state as a whole. Although theSe slight differences may be wholly the result of chance in sampling, the above inference is supported by the fact that more feeders are purchased for fattening and then resold as slaughter stock in area 1 than elsewhere. This in itself would tend to reduce the proportion of dairy and breeding cattle sales in that area. U Inter-Area Differences in Movements of Cattle and Calves roug n arte ets, x Iggkgi s It is the purpose of this chapter to present, by livestock market- ing areas, the percentage of each market class sold through each initial market outlet. In the case of slaughter cattle the breakdown has been carried one step farther, producers being classified according to the number of such cattle sold by each during the year. §laughter Cattle. The sampled farms were classified as to whether the farms were casual, medium~sized commercial, or carlot-commercial 1 . producers.'/ Data for the three classes of producers were tabulated l/In reference to cattle producers: 1. A casual producer is defined as a producer who either did not market any cattle, or sold less than M head of slaughter cattle during the year. 2. A.medium-sized commercial producer is defined as one who sold from 5 to 19 head of slaughter cattle during the year. 3. A.carlot-commercial producer is defined as one who sold over 19 head of slaughter cattle during the year. ' separately for each area. Results of this tabulation are presented in Table '8 and Figuresc , 7 , :8, and9 . Examination of the data.presented in these table and charts indi- cates that: (1) the percentage Of slaughter cattle sold to terminal markets tends to increase with the size of producer; (2) the percentages of slaughter cattle sold to concentration yards and dealers decrease with the size of producers, in all cases where some degree of confidence can be placed in the data; and (3) there seems to be no consistent correla~ tion which holds throughout the areas between size of producer and per- centage of slaughter cattle sold to packing plants, local cooperatives, auctions, and farmers. Inter-area differences in market outlets utilized by all producers of slaughter cattle among the 1515 sampled farms are indicated in Table 7 and in the portions of Figures 10 , ll , 12 , and 18 , dealing with slaughter cattle. TABLE '7. PERCENTAGES 0F SLAUOaTnR CATTLE SOLD THROUGH ALTERNATIVE MARKET OUTLETS TROM1515 mans, BY AREAS, MICHIGAN, 191m Areas . Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Market Michigan Southern Northern Upper Outlets Peninsula §g£_0ent Per Cent Per Cent §§£_Q§pt Terminal markets ......... 26.36 32.92 11.71+ 13.5 Concentration yards ...... 8.55 9.17 6.17 9.65 Packing plants 12.80 12.51 9.62 21.15 Dealers .................. 3.70 3.05 h.35 6.57 Auctions ................. lh.68 1h.22 23.28 .21 Farmers and others ....... 6.16 6.32 6.78 3.90 Totals .. ...... ........... 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Number of cattle equal to 100 per cent ....... M625 3150 988 #87 Source: 1515 mail questionnaires. - s. a .. u a a - 8N a «d u u c a u a a a 8 u an a .. .. .. a a .. a an a An .0030 angina has a.“ 300 0.1.500 on mafia—homo." 230m No." 006.303" A.- moufidgowpuosw Hanna m5.” «condom mama Hapouml ou.m mm.e sn.m om.om om.mH mm.m mm.me mm ma hobo _ N90 Ho.mH 3.30 .340“ 06.3.. 5.1m mafim mmm mdlm em.m oe.ma ow.» Hanan mm.m mm.ma mm.na mmmaaev nulrnuwuw qawasoaa mm.m ma.a mm.mn sm.mm Ho.ma we.m n ma nose om.” mm.oa as.mo am.» Hm.mm ma maum an” an.“ ma. m¢.m me.H¢ 0H.mm Hm.aa me.e mualov ...unuw m 00.3 and oe.m mm.ma nm.am mo.em n ma a96 .Hum oo.e mm.mm mm.m mm.en mm.m we.m ma.ma so ma-m on» ¢~.HH mn.am em.a mm.ms NH.H He.m mm.w manna. :.nwnp. N 00.3 Mac oa.m o».m as. Hm.mH ma.e mm.» «H.0m mm ma nope .omma an.» mm.ea am.» oe.HN em.sa mm.m eo.mm msa mane 5.0 00.3 mm.» 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 823 ... INID .n so: Educ .3 vn L m A0852 . 00 pom ”n00 pom “Eco new :00 aom £80 gem pdoo .8 . 5|. Bvflmwuom OOH 0.35.0 08:3 .0903 going. 98208 H003 mpoxnsa 053% 00.30 m In... 0.03.» r no case .3 .mooo Mesa». .8 3:83 .8 «can» 038.a mo 38 00.30 m .. tut—Cum 33.3.2.3 H0004 macaaon wdfixomm eggpqooaoo dodges Menage ll. ova." 513:3“: .0093 hp .50.“ non 330 Longs no. uoamamudao $03.90 ..I. acids 09-93 no... £0385. 38 omepqoonom .333 taxman; . a can: .330 90%.? «a fine. 3543.96 0433 on mad—homo.” mend.“ No." coca—H03... mmuwwnnomgmmmd “wax mama “monsow mandm. mumhfim mammgmfi upoxpafi mhmzpo waam p0 =mocu $05“? manmfim Hausa mo uflhQPm so mumakch nodaunfi Named ho mxmwam. mamemm cum ooacu chwahufi . . .. .. . _ ...... rt ....-.th . . . ......J.... ... . 241.2...Ysu. .... ... IL . v u. .w Q Q Q q. . "NJ"! Ammv mm LQ~.O C m w r w . - 1...... _ $5 9... o . w z w . . , I . L . .. .. ......- ...-...... NEW---.... .._... 23....-. .. . ...-J.- mmt 3:0 3...”... .. -...Mehrsfrafl _ .... ._ . . A ... . . ...... ......e... v..- .... 5 - . . ...-.... _ .. s....... r -.. . .- ., L. met...“ 2...... in... )M .. Q. JV. m._ Q we can maom you. .ozma .H «mud .makcm momm Roam .Aumm you Sham awn caow Amnesc a m suchmm . m unawah u :wououow .mumauzo m>Hauzgmaac nu;05sp uaom mauamu hwusw macaw mo mmhmp ft) '1. ‘3: 'll“. 41 4:30 pounds had 3 30a :53 no 0.3me on wanna: and.“ mm mogaonr awhwmcuofiwczd :5. mHmH “coupow mfihdm whmnno mamm ho omooo RD: ...1 ..u. «I‘Dwuuawfl dunnug II. ‘t ‘V!’ a.) all go mgmflmwm Mcwxoam kwhnm Moan”. quGHnH maaxha§ mpotha . HQOOA RC UHHOPLQ 00% .0:00 Hwfiwflhofi. 4 vb l .! . . 4’ v .1MI _ _ may Q U. , 4% Q d amwmuquhmm Q Q mflum .«o 259m .30.». pom om I .....{uufsu . . . .. ., ......b -. 4 . . . v .N ‘t . .4,1bfl‘1 It” “at. v\. 1.. ..14‘ ..I. by"... 0.5.. 11’1””“03.” ”:‘fih. l...&r.ar.\ffr ....» l . 4 .u . . .. I . ..I. rt . . ... . ...: ..I“... . .. ... \ . u. .H ... .0 4 .. . .. firfir LI... . .. .. . u. . . . in... 4 \n . (s. f‘fith’b» .Ar; Xamcqmiré W . ...s. . . .... 4. . . . . ...... ... ..... . . 4...? . 0:45.5353“... I. In. x .. 4.14 ..I u . 1‘;an (Ls £13, _ u 4 .. u 1. k . ... u. 4... . 41 . {Juntu .w-o ) . XSWNI... ....YVM... v. -. . ...-7L4!“ -.\. ...I 64“., bi a. .4.-v.1? .. l . .... I. a .....H... 4. . .. ..r ...... .1 n H Hm>o LA Mafia! . u .. $.- . 4155331 haunt. 4.1....- Jd». ....-.....- . ... IQ‘S.‘ 4.464...) 5'... . .W’. v: ..I) kg.§ L. . ... . . . MN I “a: “draw 47.... ....Un...u&| fig. . . . ) I! . .4n i.1§.CQ)I.IW:l-oa~h."u,i “.INU‘KHIIKJ’UP 15.5). r... .4....MI. \. . 4 I I 44 . ...«4. 5.... ..I, . 595...}? Watt! .....- .ghw. . . -..... ”ml-4.44... - I l I I I ‘\ I In! \\ t I l I \ O I I I, \ \ I I \ \\ p l [I I: Al I \ \ Q 4 f I Ks \ \ C ‘3‘ .4.-‘0 &. . a Q 4 V . T LI . h u. . . . ....4 4 4 L. . ...14 .w 4 a o. — J! P ' . . . ‘4. . . ~ U 8.9%. 1 . \ 1‘ .l r . - .. . 4 . :4 AM. a . ... D g . . . . . . - . s . . - . ”.0. u. \ ..v .-.viér...‘ 4‘11" .4.‘.. I.!. I U. u u.“ .rbo; . . . . .- 4'... 4. AN; .. ..J} . t .914. .. 4..|....I O a. .' . l I . .( 4* 17.”...- d ..c‘ t. 4 . . ...-.3 trim. . . . . fi N J. . o I .. ... YJJ: ......Wu..1 .hkft¢ 1A «...-.. «i'on. .... .- .U \‘aVS‘hQD‘ ...-ix 1 I L . .......§. 0-,. . I... .4.». .... .. . .4? ‘3'”; ........H...u..\‘p .. ¢® ; : K. .a.- r:- .-zu:- I ‘ Q . D \ u . . INIyI... \ov“ M'lfiflvw l I ' I x x / z I / . 1 / z . x I I 1 / I . .0. J I / / I. . w e .4.: 4 . .4.. : _ u _c. .uoxf . o c. 4 4 4.0mm. we I .. ...I. . I MW)“ . ..aktH .. 1a . . ‘1‘! . ...4 .‘léun l . p 4 9 .W. .1 IL‘ .M :l 4‘...- - \ . . Ii . .4 4 4 . L‘ . ‘. 5; Sr, . {...-....-. .... . _. ...- .4.-.... ...- . . - . .. . ... ...-0,... ,. . Ammnv .’ . . O 4 ) . 6K ix \ .L.( 4.46.4 . v . g. .VW-o . I J A ...:vprs “Lu 3 u . ..I. W U 4% J _ Q m c mu . . . Mo 02 «Jon . oz .oamH .m «44¢ sham ma: 504% ..ncwb. .80.. Ea.“ .80. “Low .235: 3 unwnuoooa .3330 wpflaahe» Hm masons... Boa mmpaco can mgucu “mag-ME“: .«o «maucmukmm o u 95mg .oudao cm.¢.::0wummqa Ham: mHmH mnpam human mawxum: mpoxpaz cheapo maaw no .9000 M09»? munqem Hmooa ho emanpm ....u uhwfi4Lm Havana... who?“ ....9 nkmmcmm wzauomm ..wcmr ..ocoo Mmcwcfimfi — .-.I. .. . . . 1 . I‘... . .. .....na. .1Mql....« WAN“... . .. (1......“. tr. .. ......a... 1.... 1‘. .. I I u u p.... .. ..I.- ..Q’. ”ré‘pwh ...I. $104on .. -.. . . .I". Q n.\ ..W. G . Q Q Q wampcmOme o ‘ ‘\\ .L I / mm 11 o .ozmH .m cwh¢ .mpmapfio upduxckwuaa sunopno cHOm mmpfimo can mwupao awarm5aam mo m¢mapzmohmc aau.h Q?~ 90AM .&a¢> Lwc Baum Lac cflca utpasa o» mcwckooua pounds hdd dd uaOn mopado no oaaamo oa_m:Hpnomou «sham om noduaoqna NmUKdom ham Amy ma .¢>o Away mflam €me . 4.0 caucm hwmw sun Ho .02 vaom com o m werpufih ItjllllllllLlfllllltmflrt .uudao annual had da daoa cabana no oflaauo on mnaauomou cinch 0mm noupdonua varninogva. U .Em“ mar.“ vabaow mEam umbum mo morn ..r mayoxhdfi mucngo maaw ho ,nooo gopua rmxcwm flamed Ln oawppm :14. mthth 304301.44 43303 40 3.4.qu?“ 61431.): H ..J, 1313.-.. 47.13.49“ .1. IPDFILV F r r . r ”In I “II } .\|-n r .. ill", l\. I I . , . . . W L . . u L 75......LL E . mmumuamohwm o AWN“ mH Rufus: Sat. SA, an .1” .LJLLLJUL;:LLL -- Ll. _ I x.” . Ir. 1%... _~.H\,....Lv .. .4'. . . .n a... L”... L. w . . 1,1X ha . Xw Awmmav 9 £30 a37q11::7,¢. ..LnnmmeI- Q . mauwh Ham» “mm 0 ZLLTLL-L-- meL.- L:!rLiSIIsI .mwo ooz vflom 00% .ozmH .awmanowm .uenma mama scum .ammh uma Shaw Lap caom gangs: 0» mcwcuooum @2390 u>3qrn3~m 550.23 “Sow mopamo use 3.33 “gnawed.“ .Ho mucuscouum o 0 Papa?“ Kglf \‘f - I\‘{ \‘l’ k" ‘r ‘ ‘ m¢uwazm0wumwflv awn; mama ' mmoppow unpam mpaxpaw mpoxhdz «Mango oacm ho .nooo umhpm gouge wannam ”mood ho Quappm no “meaemL nofiuond Hmooq ho uwflmma Mafiauam Lew .omoo Hmmwenwa 1 . 1 .. .. . . . . J. 51. IL . ._ . 1.1I1...L._ar.o.. ’!L.L .1 . i o . .. 1. km” W Li 11.0 Q 1v Q w nowmaaoOkom 03 S om mm o _ _ L11 . . _ -m , . .V, ”.41. I... 1 ).11.. J1 ., ...4. .’ . 1. (“1&1 . L. mafifimmhm .. L ..L. -._ I... BE 528 m \ H1 \\\. J! \ u \ \“ m \ \ \ \ f \ v \ \ ~n\ \ s M .\m u. ..\ . \. 1”,?” b \ r > _ uflwafihMWWWw .11 11, “mmw. - . L .L. 2rp _. .L.. 1 L... .>1. r 1 - ”Stigma?” J ””211 :1: . 11.. 3.....1.... «Hmvmmh . LL... . .1..- L. ...“..Mmtm ..1. 1......1. LL ... ......“ .... .. 95 .353 oam Hmmb hounMdem Baku mumaufio unauachmawm nwuopno ado .ozmH .auu.aowy .H ao~< .meuam mmm w mm>Hwo on: wanuco mo wowwpnmosym . OH wharm mnhwm .oamm ho :oMaofid nhmnuo ho m:makmm .6 l\ .v— .. mmnfimccowprpa H.a> mHma whwhsm .aooo "mongom W9 dam.» qua. mu. 03”th flunhe maaaam Amuofi ho ho wkgamwm .._...........1.1....~.. ..e .. . .11....9§_ . -15.... ..-- 11.1 . 1 rum“. oaapsm L wnflmuxw cow oozoo ooH mN amnasama Q .U ummmuszHom mV aux m. om . mm o . L 11. _ 4w.m1§wm.,...u. é. . 1 -ML‘. .-- ....H , L maficmmam .1. . 1 . ... . .1117 J... .131” .....LLWa . ... ”an“ a“ «an 1‘ \ . .1!!! \ \ \ \ n \1 \. \ \ \ \ \ \ x s ‘ \ \ \ K 11 \ l \. \ _ P \ . ..1.. .....v. o . O I‘lfld. .lIr n/ '. 1. 1 hi. AV? \ I 11. F «1.4 .1. 1‘ v” Ail.- . . . .1 .1 .. 5 . . 1 1 .. . . «pfiy. - . Roommz ' . 1" ... . .... u . 1...). . .s . . 11.1“ ”LS 1~.r .... ’1 .w. ' L . ”a“ “txooum .. . 1......”th L - .. 13. .H ,. LL. .29 ....L, .. . \ VI . u 11“ \ ~ _ \ \ \ \ u \ \ a \ \. \ \ . \ \ 1 x L \ ‘ \ s \ \ ‘ W1. ?: 7 L - N. N J ((1-14. ..M .. 111 . ., . . t- f ... 1 I r“. 1.1: MW% 51 ... .Xamfiun1v w - . .. . ,g.‘.1.1vn'1 . . 1a .11 . .1. 4' l I." . ”1...... 0 MW. 4. C v IW IN .1‘. a“ ...»...N .MMncrkmf «.1 w... ”Hg...¢ufl.~p~u1vl%nlw (14w. .2. H w .1 .1 3...... Mir . 11 1.1.11“. ,L. ... 1 H D. . . I 1 .1 1..“, 1.1 . 1 . . 7 W X x \ ’ r x \ r . ’ a \ \ ; / . . \ L I P\ r. . ..r .L§X$ “.4.. .1L ; . - .%L!. .-L . $111 .41X 1. -.H 11 ,X- a.” ,s}.; .Xfis- A. L .Lia n : :..< . . - . . L 1...... ..r 3.1.1.... .. . .L 1 . . . . Hougupnw Hm 19.19 «(i ..I, .... ¢ ('7 hum ‘(w All . l ...“).1. 1 I 1.. «Q ivf". igfllmw 51...... .... 1 u at ._ . r01... ...1. «.11.‘ P .. . . . . - I . . .. .1 Q kw Q _.Q m it! Q om . .uuoaozo mpwpcahmufim anachn» amen wo>aao vac wage» .ozma .m amnd .wanmm ma: Bonk 0 mo cacao Homo Ho onanoUHym . AH «human 3 H9430 mflhdm oqwn ho acanupd 1.33503111me 3% mama m a 9;..."de “DQEHAH HGQS 80 find,“ ' mpmxgafi Quansm no aunEuafl 1m ' ’ F .- C 1"“ H00.“ .11 1.1 o 3 1 o J M». . . . ‘3P‘ Up 1 1 “°) 4 3.? 1C . - 1 1. 1 . .b wage m 1. 1.... 5.! a 13.1.1. .1 .1. 11...: ...\ 11 ’3)?v....1..~.¢.1ln.1.1. v \ 12%. c .v 1 pH 1P4. ’1 .1 .... 1. :v _1 . \. 1. . .11 w 1 1' N |1VT .UL” "il L ..c. 1 . ”a 1 11 A. _u m . wwwflpdmohmm 00a 1. .m. 51‘ CI \ .u “.11 3 A..- -. 1.. . L1 . :31 1 .1 .)._1 in: 1. . 1 ...1 1 11%.1; 1 . 1 . I I, .. 1 .\\1.1\— y ..é. ..C‘..I...éHOM1.w\191(1....v\ $L'AU‘V.‘ “ii—1 .1 1111‘111HL\‘.. ...I... . .14 . a I. 1 .1 c u. L. .. .1... ..lv 1 1r . . .Ffl‘1 1 1.11.1..5‘1.... 1M3...r11..041 111..|....4.w\1“1..v 1... 1 h M7.UV.1¥\1.:1.‘1..“N_. h5.M{.O11.J WP J . I - .... 1 1.. .1 1U». . :.111 . . ..1....34.¢ 7“.“711. 1. N1..1..i1|... . r. 1., 1.5 h +11a1t191117 I 1X.” L. 1.3.1,: 11311011 I .1. 1. .1.1 . . 011.1101. L11. in)“ .1 .... . .. .. . p . ... 1.. .gvaTnI-sn 1 . 1 . . 1 *1 1.1hm. _. ... . ......11..1... ~ \ I 1’ ‘l . ‘11 _ . I I I I! I I I I / (I ll 5’ .1 . l I .19. L1“. 1.. I ” I 1’ I . IM.I*H~I \ by {1 M 1 . «11.1.11 1 . . 1 1 11 1 1 1 . _ 1 . a. ., 4 \ 1 \ z \ 11 \ \ d 1\ \ — P l 1‘ 1‘ \ \ . . .) . .11 I‘ ‘1 K \J \ '11 1. 1 n l * 3| .- ‘11.- ! 11.. .‘f’ I ’1‘) .‘vxr‘r .. 1111. . 7.1xdh17...1 .1 J . 1 1 .. . . . 1111 \.o. . ..I I ,. _ . .... .11.... L .. . .. - .. .. . 1..-...11. 11. . .1 . -.....1... “1,1. .. 11.11 .......-. 41...!1‘I-fl . . 1.. x \ r . \\ I. . 7 § \ _ ...»...nh.1n.....iz.t7v 11913.1. ...»... .11.... . . 11. 2 1.1..” .....1.q.¢..\....1~...r1¢11a~1u1.fl11 . . 1.. if .... .. 1.1.1.1(3115. ...1. .. ... so. LMUJMP.......1......~.11._.....1H 231.814.. . ....L._..§...1. .. 111.4%. ...I.3...Iu1.-L JV. 4 .11. I/ s. Q .3335 25.23.33» £395» 33 :53 {\fiflllllllerllt1fzhfll11 102m.” .ammgog .m «0.3 .2.an 9:" 80.5 cam maouwu mo numao nose mo mmuuqooumm MN “muhflom Mdufiwohm can magma houcmh vac hoXUOpw H¢¢> hapnwaaam 1 NH unnmah . 3.“? u: u I. mum“ .....L.?._m. unhdm :whfi« mumxhaw m mkmzpo maqm ho cQOOJ qudmu wuzm4n amuoq.ho mmemfi. ho whwnhhlm. $0309..“ .wdwfiomw‘ 0300 £ iwwlwlfls: 50M 7 4. Mflwwwmhm cam xuamm umnwmh can meuoam . Mamw Hm.“ rmHm ...d: L o . . . 5:? £322... .35 SS :25; 3330 ......stoéwfi a . . m o ow¢ o mmmapcMOhmm 33.3."an £385 30a 35:0 can aggro we a... H n m an. . i. I, - ‘ I a, o ‘1 . xx RIF: ..-: \Kfi! -.II. \ ) 3, ..I x»: i- \. r! -- --L 48 Explanation of these inter-area differences will be facilitated if it is borne in mind by the reader that the identification numbers of the areas from south to north correspond to their rank in reSpect to pOpulation, soil fertility, and distance from terminal markets. More- over, as shown in Chapter II, greater statistical reliability can be attached to the data for area 1 than for the two more northerly areas. Considerable inter-area differences exist in the utilization of initial market outlets for selling slaughter Cattle. In area 1, terminal markets were the most important single market outlet; in areas 2 and 3, terminal markets occupy a.position of lesser importance in comparison with area 1 and also with respect to other outlets in these two northerly areas. Assembly market outlets, including concentration yards, dealers, local cooperatives, and auctions, are more important in the northern areas as would be expected in view of: (l) the more distant location of these areas from Detroit, and (2) the widely scattered small lot production of cattle in these areas. The importance of dealers can be accounted for by the efficiency and convenience with which they perform the assembling function among the small,widely scattered producers. Terminal markets, on the other hand, are better suited to the large producer who is more concerned with such factors as price and dependability than with convenience and imme— diate payment. Auctions owe their pOpularity to factors similar to those causing farmers to patronize dealers. In area 2, where production g/Data tabulated in the Experiment Station project, but not present- ed in this thesis, support the conclusion that large producers are more concerned with "dependability" factors than with convenience and immediate payment. 49 is in medium sized lots, but from which it is generally inconvenient to ship to terminals, auctions enjoy their greatest pepularity as a market for slaughter cattle. The varying importance of packing plants is pro— bably conditioned more upon the relation between local production and the needs of the packing plants rather than by preferences of the pro- ducers themselves. Concentration markets, local cooperatives and farmers occupy positions of varying minor importance. For the state as a whole, sample data in regard to sales of ”,625 slaughter cattle to initial market outlets indicate that terminal public markets received directly about one quarter of slaughter cattle sold from farms; a slightly larger prOportion is purchased by dealers. As— sembling markets, inclusive of dealers, received about 55 per cent, while about 19 per cent was purchased for immediate slaughter by packing plants and local butchers. (Figure 13.) Veal Calves. Table 9 and the portions of Figures LC, 11, 12, and 13 dealing with veal calves show numbers of veal calves sold from sample farms for each area and for the state as a whole,as well as the percen- tages of the veal sold to the various alternative initial market outlets. When the utilization of individual initial market outlets for veal is considered on an area basis the following can be stated: in area 1, terminal markets and auctions were the most important of the initial markets; in area 2 which is farther away from the terminals, the auctions were most important, dealers second most important, and concentration yards approximately as important as the terminal markets; in area 3, the most important initial market outlet was dealers, with concentration yards second in importance, while terminal markets, packing plants, local co- operatives, and farmers occupied positions of lesser importance. TABLE 9. PERCENTAGES OF VEAL cuvss SOLD THROUGH ALTam-IATIVE MARKET OUTLET FROM 1515 FARMS, BY AREAS, MICHIGAN 191m Areas , 1. ? Area 1 Area 2 Area ,3 markets Llehiban Southern Central Upper Peninsula Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent Terminal markets ......... 19.35 22.26 12.25 12.80 Concentration yards ...... 16.52 17-73 12.69 15.h0 Packing plants . ........ .. 9.111L 9.79 5.73 11.27 Dealers .......... . 20.1h 16.92 25.62 31.89 Local Cooperatives . ...... 6.90 5.85 8.09 11.3% Auctions .. .............. . 20.87 21.0” 30-90 - Farmers .................. 7.03 6.hl n.72 16.27 Totals ...- ........ ........ 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Number of calves equal to 100 per cent M949 3198 890 M61 Source: 1515 mail questionnaires. The three most important single market outlets for veal in the state, auctions, dealers, and terminals, ewe their importance to different fac- tors in different areas. In area 1 proximity to Detroit and more direct rail connections with Buffalo and Chicago undoubtedly accounts for the greater use of terminal markets. Furthermore, in area 1, the presence of eastern buyers for veal calves at the auctions in this area probably maintains price relationships making it advantageous for a large number of farmers in the southern tier of counties to market veal calves at auctions. In area 2 distance from terminal markets tends to accentuate the use of auctions for veal calves. Dealers, in area 2, also take a large prOportion of the veal calves sold. A major factor accounting for the extensive patronage of dealers and truckers is the convenience of selling the relatively low valued veal calves to a dealer coming past the barnyard in his truck. In area 3, where auctions are non~existent 51 and dairying is relatively more important, the convenience factor is even of greater consequence, thus explaining the great importance of dealers in that area. While local cOOperatives are comparatively unimportant as a market for most livestock, they are quite popular for veal which can be shipped with mixed carloads of hogs or sheep, thus obviating the necessity of getting large numbers together for shipment. For the state as a whole, 19 per cent of the N,5M9 veal calves in the sample were sold to terminal markets; 16 per cent was sold to imme~ diate slaughter markets. Auctions, dealers, and terminals, in the order named, competed very closely for the dominant position by each taking approximately one-fifth of the total number sold. Concentration yards were quite important, while packing plants, farmers, and local cooperap tives were of lesser significance. Stocker and Feeder Cattle. The number of stocker and feeder cattle sold from sampled farms in each marketing area and in the entire state as well as the percentages thereof going to each alternative market out- let are shown in Table 10 and in the portions of Figures I) , 11,12 , and13 , dealing with stocker and feeder cattle. Sampled farms in areas 2 and 3, the northern areas, sold proportion— ately less stockers and feeders to terminal markets than sampled farms in area 1. This was offset to a certain extent by the greater relative importance, in the northern areas, of local cooperatives through which stockers and feeders pass to terminal clearing point market outlets. Local clearing point market outlets (including dealers, auctions, and concentration yards as a group) were relatively more important in the northern areas where scarcity of feedstuffs leads to feeders and stockers I'- 52 being sold through terminal markets handling inter- and intrararea trade. Scarcity of feed, likewise, tends to reduce the importance of farmers as a market outlet for this class of cattle. TABLE 10. PERCENTAGES or STOCKER AND FEEDER CALVES SOLD THROUGH ALTERNATIVE MARKET OUTLETS FROM 1515 Trans, BY AREAS, MICHIGAN, igho r t Areas . . Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 in arkets Michigan Southern Central Upper Peninsula Eg; Cent §§£_Cent Per Cent Per Cent Terminal markets .......... 11.30 1M.53 6.77 .68 Concentration yards ....... 8.33 10.31 5.23 12-25 PaCking plants .ooo. ...... 0 he 7 5001 3085 2001+ Dealers ... .............. .. 22.97 11.h5 39.08 61.22 Local COOperatives ....... . 1.87 .57 3.07 8.8M AuCtj-ons o o ....... a oooooooo 1291‘.0 10.88 180116 ”'“- Farmers . ..... .. ........... 38.06 h7.25 23.5% 1h.97 Totals .. .................. 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Number of calves equal to 100 per cent . ...... . 219M 1397 650 1M7 Source: 1515 mail questionnaires The entire state sample reported 219M stocker and feeder cattle sold, 38 per cent of which was sold directly to other farms. Forty-four per cent was sold to local clearing point markets and 13 per cent was sold to terminal clearing point markets. Five per cent went to packing plants. Most important of the local clearing point channels were deal- ers: second most important were auctions. These two media are very well adapted to the performance of the local clearing point function both as to convenience to farmers and as to efficiency. Clearing through these markets is generally on a relatively local basis but may assume inter- interregional prOportion, as in area 2, where dealer ranchers purchase feeders from the western range, acclimate them on summer grass, and, then, distribute them in small lots to feeders throughout the state. Daigy and Breeding Cattle. The distribution of the 1771 breeding cattle sold on sampled farms by areas and the percentages sold through alternative initial market outlets, by areas, are given in Table 11 and in the portions of Figurele , 11 , 12 , and13 , dealing with dairy and breeding cattle. If an analysis of the utilization of markets by farmers selling dairy and breeding cattle is made by areas from north to south certain inter-area characteristics can be ascertained. Characteristics associa- ted with the areas from north to south are: decreasing fertility and pOpulation, increasing distance from terminals, and decreasing reliabil- ity of data in the sample data under consideration. TABLE 11. PERCENTAGES OF DAIRY AND BREEDING CATTLE SOLD THROUGH ALTERHAIIVE MARKET OUTLET FROM 1515 TERMS, BY AREAS, MICHIGAN, 191K) Areas . . Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 ., .7 0* Markets kIChlban Southern Central Upper . Peninsula Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent Le}; Cali—— Terminal markets .. ...... . 12.25 11.68 )4.30 35.87 Concentration yards ...... 2.72 2.1Lt 3.23 1.09 Packing plants ........... 3.22 ”.10 1.51 2-17 Dealers . ................. 21.17 13.90 31.61 39.13 Local COOperatives . ...... 1.58 1.60 1.07 2.72 Auctions...” ...... . ..... . 9.32 9.89 10.511: 2.72 Farmers .......... ..... ... 50.1“ 56.69 ”7.7“ 16.30 Totals ... ............. ... 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Number of Cattle equal to 100 per cent 1771 1122 M65 181+ Source: 1515 mail questionnaires Terminal markets and local cooperatives, the two initial market out- lets performing a terminal clearing point function, were of greater pro- portional importance in area 1 than in area 2. The data indicate that 35 per cent of the dairy and breeding cattle in area 3 were sold to term- inal markets. In view, however, of distance from the terminal markets, it is likely that this figure is considerably higher than the actual situa— tion throughout the area. Concentration yards, dealers, and auctions, the initial market out- lets performinr the local clearing point function, are of greater impor- tance in area 1 than in areas 2 and 3. Movements of dairy and breeding cattle from farm to farm are of much greater importance in areas 1 and 2 than in area 3 according to the sample data. This is to be eXpected in view of the fact that shortages of feed supplies in the northern areas make it necessary for the surpluses of dairy and breeding cattle to move considerable distances, thus necessitating greater use of terminal and local clearing point markets. 55 CHAPTER IV novmsuzrs or HOGS AND PIGS TO myrrh. hggmg Relative Importance of Market Classes of Hogs and.Pigs by Livestock Marketing Areas In this introductory section, the relative importance of the three major market classes of hogs are shown as revealed by the sample for the state and the three component marketing areas. Such a procedure will facilitate the attaching of significance to differences in initial mar- ket outlets utilized in marketing hogs and pigs. Slaughter Hogs. Eighty per cent of all hogs and pigs reported sold in the entire state sample were slaughter hogs. Taking into considera— tion the necessary qualifications of the data, it is probably safe to indicate that the percentage of all hogs sold which are sold as slaughter hogs decreases from north to south. This would be expected in view of a corresponding decrease in available concentrates for fattening begs. Feeder Hogg, Eighteen per cent of all hogs and pigs reported sold from the sampled farms were feeder h0gs. Lack of available feed supplies and irregularity of feed production would be expected to cause large per- centages of the hogs marketed from farms in the northern areas to be sold as feeder h0gs; this hypothesis is borne out by the data derived from the samples. (See Table12 and Figure 14). Breeding Hogs. A.practically constant ratio of breeding hag sales to all hog and pig sales was found to exist throughout the three areas in the sample data; that is, approximately 2.5 Per cent of all h0g5 sold were breeding hogs in all areas. 56 .mmnamscoapmozw Hams mama “condom q . 9:3 8. m S . 3 d . Q. mow 3.3 gasses: N9 mm.m Bdm 8.8 :m oi n more Nowm ww.m mm.mN :w.o~ Hzm ma: m wand momma wo.m m~.mH mH.Nm mmm mmm H mend nmpapz puma nom pnoo nom puma Hem nopapz umpapz puma mom 00H 0» mmog mcfiwmmnm mwog ameoem wwog smp£m5cam dHOm mwofi mafiaaocn mead Hmnvm wmaa was usapaoceh messy mo mmon mo 3952 mass.“ so Seam Mopeds .OJmH gamwflowx .mmmsm mp .mEadm mama Eopm depotha mmwm was mmom anOp Mo as were? wmmao some seams mumpsmomom . Natl.mapca 57 = g . a a so; new acmowumeflo awn; mHmH -0 U ., .. 0.314 m4) \ massage munwulu oar. w: a musics a. l A» D E ..3.+&Mhflwuthws . .... ... . .. a w.”.r\..-«fl 13.5.5w; .4 Java Sr: A“ l. ., - — ht“ . _v. .0 [1»... :HNVr (.Aahflk. ».«. t . . «. Fruivo, Fl .4“. . y. ... . ,.. . . . , . C. flv fi\ mmepncoamM OW. w. u b AmHmHv nauseous mozav n . Amaze m Ammmv . a '1 «Shah 0 oz om mm 0 Ho 0 oz awhd . QOJWH ocmflwfluwfi ammbkfi hp .WERQH mHmH Baum nonsense mmun can awe: Haas» no a: «mama wmmflo goat scan: memeanooacm .I¢A magnum Inter-Area.Differences in Movements of Hogs and Pigs Through Initial Market Outlets, Bx MfiEEQE Clggsgg Inter-area differences in the percentages of each of the above dis— cussed market classes going to alternative initial market outlets are considered in this section. Slaughter Hogg. In order to obtain a rough indication of the asso- ciation between volume of hog marketings from individual farms and per— centages sold through various initial market outlets, the schedules were grouped and tabulated according to whether they represented casual, medium sized, or carlot hog producers.l/ The resulting data are presented in Table 13 . The relationships indicated in this tabulation are presented graphically in Figures 15, 16, 17, and 18 showing initial market outlets utilized by the different sized producers for each of the marketing areas and for the state. Upon examining the data, it is evident that relationships in area 1, which produces over 80 per cent of the slaughter hogs in the state, de- termine to a considerable extent the relationships found for the state as a whole. Hence, area 1, the southern area, and the state are discussed first and concurrently. Discussion of areas 2 and 3 consitutes therefore mainly a consideration of exceptions to general conditions. In area 1 and generally among important hog producers, large pro- l'/In reference to hOg producers: 1. A casual producer is defined as a farmer who either did not market any slaughter hogs, or who sold less than 10 head during the year. 2. A.medium—sized commercial producer is defined as a.producer selling 10-59 head of slaughter hogs during the year. 3. A.carlot producer is defined as a.producer selling 60 or more head of slaughter hogs during the year. .. s s a s a s s s .005 s “d s a c .. a a a a .. won 3 A0 .. .. a .. a .. .. .. .. m5” .. 3 $ 63.3 noxuda has a." .33 amen on magma?» earns.“ MN... nogaoda Ad acaddddOHvaodd Had! mHmH «oogom H ma. 3%: Hm emu a? 3.: and 8.: was was mum am .3» mm mum tr: e: 3.3 ads and Mum“ mm? ammo I mm H la 3 mm m 5 mm 6 2 mo i m “3 dunno“: 9.. was as as... as... 5% a a1: 3. wmém $33 8:3 wad. Rama mafia m? E To N as: and: 3.23 now €3.39?" moz mm Hobo mama mm.m 3.5 f; 3:: mw.m mm.: 3.? mm «9.0 3m RA: £..- an; ~93. :mfi mo.m 6.? 3m 2: I mac m 8.3 .411! t { «mam Path :9: W419 mm; mmim mm.mH Rama :m mm .85 Hmza mz.H mm.ma o.~ mm.mH mm.mm wo.:H mm.mm com mmaoa 03 mmrfi 84: id. 5.4m Sr: 9.3 3.3 mmm A3 muo .H. 8.: hang: ,pnoo new 280 pom name hem ammo pom nee wleM. ammo ...HMM pace mm 3952.. 1 Quote hon 00H muonpo magma. own-mud 5935. mquHma .3qu 3&th wand.“ ll 3 3.980 Mooum .3 came .8 .mooo M33 .3 353 .3 mean.» 3.3mm no and? lo»: Mo hoe—am anagram 3030.3. Hmooq mnodmom wages." sogmupdmoaoo 33393. 3955 :3 00.3on . .33 .333: .323 an .nhu son 3: ~35... .3 Sass-Ho :53. «in... u. .83 52 £32» 32. 53.8..“ :63 33.93% ....m ..Buu .V\ . «Susanna: .23 0 $3.38 93 3 .33 «won on 3399mm.» wand.“ mg H noa«w:¢o«umosu Mums mama ”ouhpom an.” . dm 0H0? wdethm mfithdfi m$2.5 Sam .3 deco £03m. .3ng .3qu no 3.35m Ho 938.234 "3305.“! 4&03 ho runaway: wiwdonu om...” ammo... In--s...-m.. . .. . «lulu: ..I! r! Wfilflflwififiw- n”.-- ...M. ... . . , W... . ,. ... ..A _ .... . ..H .. ...; r ..-.w..- n. .fzar... .... .... .. hum .W U. Q U my fix amMmucmuumm Azmv .oo awpo 802 m1: Ammwv o mlo Deon Ch gnaw» pawn H0 002 WHO” .02 oonvm.H .H 3.2 Jana.“ omm 88% .305 .39 5.3.“ .39 39a. .3989: on wnwuhouuc 33.26 33.32»? nwfiounp 30a mwa cum muorgwunwamwm. mo wwmvnmoawm . we Spurn "J 61 .mmwao pmtha ham ma daom mwog on wnfipnommn manmh wNH modsaosHi mohawnGOapme? “Ham mama “oohsom mnpdm wu¢msm . upmxymz mpoxudfi whmnuo onw Ho oQOfib xonpb munaam fimoOH mo oflanpm ho hmfikah noduonq chou mhm~m¢c mewxumm gawk osco Haaweaae A-A..m wm A . A . A .mmm.mwmwwwwmfimwa . ...n y. 3...; .. . .... .... .. 115$ k..!....ni.... A... A. ....A- Ali .. . .- . I: 5.1% M4 UA wa AV 6 Q . Q mmwmacmugmm . 02 2. 8 mm o - - ‘w A H mmcflo ..wcu a“, wuuhomwk anon, new mm. .5pr ‘Aw- .. Amhu mm|o~ \ 1 1 s k SEC .. muo v.8 M An. A - . mahch haw» hem A _. Q Q - Ho 32 Bow 32 . cm mm o .oama .m «mud .nagam ma: Boga .aamh you Eumh uwn nfiow umpena o» udfiogooua uuofiao oaaaacpcuaw swap—5 30m mafia can macs gapnmflmfia me wwmwuamoaum . 0H. _ mafia xx ..||.‘..|ld. ‘ ’vrtp‘tn Q 62 .mde0 pmxnwa.hqw Ga caom mmon on mnfipuomon manmm moH moddaonH§ .5: avg: mum. “wugzom mmuwcucowumu;c . . wfigdm . . mhmhfim «pmyuc: avoMLwE mhwzuo oaaw ho onooo xwzab muggwa Hanan «0 ufimwpm Mb unvaamu moaaaat 433:4 ho maqumA . .; .s u Juawvxqa r A 2%. .r, - » . p . . Pymw . 1 VA. 7 «A. .* .A..#1 A . w “w.!. . Hmw AA ..ALAA . fl .. . .a A ... ... .13.}. .A A v mmflwpmuonLk .A U D a In. (I! Iltlllillluil‘l . . A q .u .A. . A AA A -.. . . IA . elk I'H‘iaqi‘rwv‘ Av) i v. . .. h. . -.....x. .. ....... A, -..... 7A.. m\ hwmvo . _Amm;mm.¢mw;nu..Au . y .14 yrnrmeWwA “Av u -ltéoillhll‘ihl‘llluriutv? \ x . . u x A _ Jawrwfiwafl. ..... ..AgmwmnwwA.. an. mmao. . _ ”Huigflwmr ..w........_ . . .3 A va‘ilj “ mao hamw hmfi Owow 96% eozma .m awyd .mehmm 02H non“ Rama hua.npma mu cflmm h¢nedm om mcmwuooum ..huoauso mpdammpmuaa snacks“ dHOu wwwa can mo; kmeuSQHw mo mumucmuham . 5H «usmwm ' r ILv ..I (I! . ‘I ..I. _ .' 'I. 't N“ .mmmao poxnda saw a“ uHom mMOn on mnfipnomvh manmm NON mmdfiaonHi A. w .umfiwnaoflugd Sam 33 $0.58 _ a n nEam gonna 33E“: upoMndE nmnuo oaam ho .nooo gosh. w o . 23 163 .3 Spam . ho ammahmh nownoz¢ Macon no mquaww manxomw one. .oamu magmanmm axfimwmflufw . . . s .A - . uArxmwflmw. A ”L. I :» n: ;A.wfi- A»? AhflmwafiwnAA A .}. An .awMHVJMPA..Au..;A ..A.:,. .. .- hum Q Q .M d \m Q Q nowmucmonym .... 38:. To 3 ..Au ..-an «Shah Anne» .39 . A no can caow co..— m A. is. . . . , cammouoaaHMOHz uEAWh mHmH Baum .ua¢a men each Ann csou Athena 0a ucwohoouc a »_u¢:u¢uan arachna caon mafia one uto: heunesddo no mcucuccou¢m . ma ouamuh r\[Lf i I! {If Lu‘filr g1 [L‘r I" [\(ll 64 ducers sell larger prOportions of their slaughter hogs directly to ter- minal markets than do small producers. The same generalization is ape plicable in regard to direct sales to packing plants and local cooperap tives. The reverse appears with respect to disposal through dealers and auctions, in that the larger producers as a group tend to utilize these outlets to a lesser extent. Portions of the data indicate that larger producers patronize the concentration yards to a greater extent than small producers. For areas 2 and 3 the data are rather inconclusive when broken down as to size of producer. It appears however that terminal markets are of lesser importance as outlets to all producers in these areas than are auctions, dealers, or concentration yards which act to assemble the wide— ly scattered local production. Inter-area differences in market outlets utilized by all producers of slaughter hogs, as revealed by the tabulation of the sample data, are indicated in Table 14, or can be seen graphically by comparing the por- tion of Figures 19,20 .21, & 22dealing with slaughter hogs. It is probable that some generalizations can be validly drawn from the sample data in respect to actual utilization of the alternative market outlets for hogs. Farmers in area 1 made a greater use of termi- nal markets than did farmers in areas 2 and 3; likewise, farmers in area 2 made a greater use of terminal markets than farmers in area 3. Distance from terminal markets and more widely scattered production of small quan- tities per farm tend to account for the slight utilization of terminal markets in the two northerly areas. Probably, these same factors tend in turn to account for the greater utilization by producers in these areas of local assembling markets. Greater prOportions of slaughter "A... 65 TABLE 14 PERCENTAGES or SLAUGHTER HOGS SOLD THROUGH ALTERNATIVE OUTLETS FROM 1515 FARMS, BY AREAS, MICHIGAN, 19uo Areas Market Outlets Michigan Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Southern Northern Upper Peninsula Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent Terminal markets 0 o o o o o o o 22076 214,076 11+.OO 7‘63 Concentration yards ..... 15.80 15.35 15.5 35.11 Packing plants ..... ..... 20.98 23.28 8.36 22.1h Dealers ................. 1h.37 13.67 18.29 13,7u Local CooPeratives ...... 7.82 8.00 6.06 13.36 Auctions.......... ....... 1A.}; 12.51 26.17 --- Farmers ................. 3.9h 2.h3 11.55 8.02 Totals . ................. 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Number of hogs equal to 100 per cent. 12538 10362 191M 262 Source: 1515 mail questionnaires. hogs produced were probably sold to local packing plants or butchers in the northern areas because a considerable number of the begs sold direct - to packers in area 1 were sold to terminal packing plants at Detroit. In Chapter I three types of initial market movements of Slaughter livestock were outlined: movements direct to terminals, movements to local assembling markets, and movements to markets of local slaughter. In regard to these movements the following generalizations can be drawn: (1) movements of slaughter hogs to terminal markets are as stated above; (2) movements to local assembly markets are of greater importance in the northern areas than in the south due to increased distance from terminals and more widely scattered production in smaller lots in the north. Lack of feedstuffs, due to unfavorable soil and climatic conditions, limits the production of high quality slaughter hogs in the northern areas; \ % 3:533:25 Haas mama ”00.58 3.3m 935.5 madame: 303.32 9550 01m no onooo Meg manna .303 no 0303 .3 auwmmmh .33an 303 so mama—sun mimosa” one» .930 .3553 ...rgii, . .. .. . . . . ......,.....,.H.AA....H.MAW..N... .... -21.... 3 % U. KW Q \Q Q Q unmeasoouom o uncooum smooch C n..- rlvfiy% fifitmnul\xx .0...vM......:..J. 7 . ..... gems.» ”we“? . Eva‘s. . .032 .H 3.3 68.3.“ can . 3325 33.3.3»: sung go: 330 on: one: we .930 gene we oommwmcouem A. 3.. can 67 mEdm aswduo oHcm so so «soasmm seduces .nooo mecca so msoacmq l mossmsdo«ameso Ham: mama osomdm fleas a cam Hm mnHMom nsossea Haven so es .oeoo noossom upoxssfi oaandm Hmswesoa 2 , l -l - .. ./.............A :4 . . Us . 4 lo . .......1 ... ..1- ,. a .11.}, I - WN:{WJ..HD In «...-.5... I... — . . r .1 no mm A» nawmamcosom us ... --. mm mm mu m unmao ass» som massages msoz mssumosm V , ’. ..LI. l ”(MW)” :.I: Us.11.. 1 . .. 1». . » .1. . A . : 5.-.}.niw-v mm.” . .. . - - .. . 1 . ... .-.. .. .sw ,uflm.e1..whw . . IN “”0 0 I tut-.13.... .itlmlefl LL. .rf "A I LP? .. brawn-.5:- 1.11.... “...-...; .m I r — - . I . .isr31. \- . . I I \ I I § / . x / / y z . l ...A. / - .. . \ / . M a ”Wfln - “W A -1” x m ..ww swunwpcam MW“?.... 0.. L .... Aw! ~. . ...I... .Iv. .M .. 4. . If. . L -..“...xlka .uwflawwmpwi mo LR -% J. N MQ om mm o .32 cams Am ses< .asscs.msz sass man goes Mo wmwmuumuscm awan was awed mo an 6 8 “hdenh 68 mkapO ho mhmeumh mchdm «Haw ho composm .0 "habfifl 3Q)fll\l F r... u%:whw uw.AmM.. .d . 4) 4. n L! Houofi ho mhmaaom mawfluqa fl" ~§"I «15.3.3.3 i. u. 14“.!" .l‘hlt‘lfgn \ .mmUMQCQOwuwmuU chfi mama "mumsoo mpmxpms uwanfim Hmaflak¢& . w _ # {vi-ill! 'n'Jt .. .l‘ul" ht m ls D aiti:!:--.-il -r. n w u . M u . . m wcwumwym u\ k - s 1.. K . .u . - . k¢mem - ¢ . .. m . . I... -..-Eli!!- raglan. . k I.- Iuinui‘ll tJ‘IH‘IOh [lit-H \xl“ I‘I A is.vfi\W%r\V-- @ .III |.Iu\ [nil ll-Itt\ ..I! I‘M-tu- ‘I! ‘Iv Ill . \Il I“ II.- Illll 0|: .II- IIHII ‘3‘ III-1|. Wt .lll Ill ‘1! II»! ..I- . \\ I. ...I. 1| 1| ‘1. till ||\ A \\ . flzwliu n u .m a m awgnusuyn .% .Jli}rz.s-l;1-§ -iélil§ttix..lt§:- 1:11} . ._ - “a -- . .. . .-.I-s-;- -% w. W n N. T _ 1- aiiiilll w 00M up a. mm .10 Scam amtha ‘1 .3 “mufi .m m¢h< nowm k0 .mEpm oxaacwumww o :.wpfiwfih amuflaaaofipmgaa Hfiax mamfl mflgdm aaoflhmz . wumnao «Ham Ho .9000 awham xusha median Hmoog no. mwmflmmw no muoahmh acaaosd Among .uo whoammm mnaxomm can» ooaoo “mnwahm- ..- - e.- ._ .- .._ .m ; .4mw nx c- mN I l n M .. w- 911... 3%....11‘ ... f. ¢§§§smfwfims ..I... a .5 “fad {up-(numb. ”a ... . ... a . . f ....9 ......- figpflflififlf .. 1w... . - “Karin . . . m... g...“ ...-$.31... . 5...). . ...- . ..a .. I»? ..... .. . v _ . ..v... _ .42 fl'Ll. ..Z.§.\€ . . 4. .| :2 ... . . .‘Ilua . uWI. ... . . ... a...w5.$.aJ . . . .. lung‘s . ...,.y-.. 5... .«M4... ”.....Ma...“ 1 .numfluzo mpaumququ axaoknw ‘I'I, uqom mm4n. was .oxma .qamHnUNE awon Ho mmmfio momm mo mmmmpcmvnxh .mehaw mflmfl up ”mouaow wdaumvnm uoumvm yougmficaw_ 44. mm mafirdm l 'ltl n‘l I'tvll‘l 7O distance from feed supplies and consuming centers raises transportation costs to such an extent as to make it impracticable to produce finished hogs from shippedpin feeds except for the small local consumption, Feeder gng, Sales of feeder hogs were not of enough importance to justify tabulation of markets utilized by size of producer; hence, dis- cussion of markets utilized by Michigan farmers when selling feeder hogs is limited to a discussion of inter-area differences. Inter-area differ- ences are indicated in Table 15. or can be seen by comparing the per— tions of Figures 19 .3.) .21 , and 22 which deal with feeder hogs. A factor of primary importance in determining whether or not hogs will be sold as feeders or as finished hogs is the availability of con- centrated feedstuffs. In view of the cheapness and ease with which con- siderable number of feeders can be produced by farmers having access to feedstuffs either on their own farms or from cheap off-farm sources, there is little inducement for such farmers to buy feeder stock from other areas, unless they can be purchased at distinctly favorable prices. This is borne out by the fact that there is no large specialized feeder hog producing area in the United States. Short feed creps in areas such as Minnesota, the Dakotas, Missouri, Kansas, and in individual corn belt sections may at times, however, cause considerable movements of feeders from such areas to farms with abundant feed supplies. Michigan is on the periphery of the corn belt and is subject to fluctuating supplies of feed crepe; consequently, there is a considerable trade in feeder h0g3 both within areas and between areas, In area 1, the most important Michigan feed producing region, con- siderable numbers of feeder hogs were reported sold to inter- and intras area clearing point markets (auctions, concentration yards, and dealers) 71 PERCENTAGES OF FEEDER HOGS SOLD THROUGH ALTERNATIVE MARKET OUTLETS FROM 1515 FARMS, BY AREAS, MICHIGAN, iguo Areas Markets Michigan Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Southern Central Upper Peninsula _gg Cent §§g_Cent Per Cent Per Cent Terminal markets .... ..... 6.09 7,81 2.66 --- Concentration yards ...... 7.70 10.13 2.66 --- ~Packing plants ........... 10.57 1h.06 3.23 ““‘ Dealers . ...... . .......... 8.09 7.36 9.52 3.1“ Local Cooperatives . ...... n.52 5.59 2.53 --- Auctions . . . . ............. 17.22 16.57 22.86 ---. Farmers . ................. “5.81 37.98 56.2% 96.86 Totals ... ......... ....... 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Number of Hogs equal to 100 per cent . 2857 1985 713 159 Source: 1515 mail questionnaires. indicating that a considerable market movement was necessary to effect the transfer from producer to producer. Due, however, to general avail- ability of feedstuffs this area reports only a small proportion of all hOg sales as feeder hog sales. The data reflects the lack of feed grain production in area 2 in two ways: (1) less h0gs are produced and (2) a larger prOportion are sold as feeders which also indicates irregularity of grain production, In area 2 large prOportions of hogs sold as feeders move direct from farm to farm, while smaller prOportions move to inter~and intra—area clearing points from which they probably move south to the feedstuffs of area 1, If any validity can be attached to the data from area 3, they in~ dicate that a large proportion of all hogs sold are sold as feeder hogs 72 and that the largest prOportion of feeder hogs is sold direct from farm to farm, In view of the meager production of hogs and feedstuffs in this area, this can be expected to hold true as the sales probably con- sist of one or two hugs sold to a neighbor who in turn fattens them for home consumption on kitchen refuse. Breeding Eggg, As in the Case of feeder hogs the primary object of trade in breeding hogs is to move the animals from one producer to another, not from producer to slaughterer, Hence, it is generally where large quantities or very high qualities of breeding animals are sold that the more highly deveIOped marketing mechanisms such as terminal markets and concentration yards or purebred auctions as distinct from the com~ munity auctions are utilized. Data on breeding hog trade secured from this study are very meager and unreliable. The data secured are presented in Tanks 16. The same data are shown graphically in the portion of Figures 19 , ao . 21 , and 22 dealing with breeding hogs, Table 16 permits a few very limited generalizations to be drawn relative to inter-area differences in the utilization of outlets by farm- ers selling breeding hogs. Inadequacy of sample size limits the confi- dence which can be placed in the data. Little can be stated in regard to area 3. In area 2 the data indicate that farmers utilized auctions when selling breeding hogs to a greater extent than in area 1, while farm- ers in area 1 tended to sell a large prOportion of breeding hogs direct to other farms, Assuming this to be true, two possible eXplanations can be advanced: (l) auctions were widely used in area 2 for all species and classes of livestock; hence, farmers tended to sell the relatively small amount of breeding hogs through the same channel; and (2) the greater M.fi ...—_4 , PERCENTAGES OF BREED TABLE 16. 73 ING HOGS SOLD THROUGH ALTERNATIVE MARKET OUTLETS FROM 1515 Finns, BY mamas, MICHIGAN, lgho Areas Markets Michigan Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Southern Central Upper Peninsula §g£_Cent Per Cent Per Cent Egg Cent Terminal markets .. ...... . 5.1 5.72 n.00 -—- Concentration yards ...... 10.66 8.78 16.00 -~- Packing plants . ....... ... 2.59 3.4” -—- -~- Dealers ..... ..... . ...... . 11.h9 11.07 1h.67 --- Local COOperatives ....... .57 .76 --- --- Auctions ..... ...... ...... 11.78 6.11 33.33 -" Farmers ... ............... 58.3h 6u.12 32.00 100.00 Totals ........ ........... 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Number of hogs equal to 100 per cent ....... 3M8 262 75 ll Source: 1515 mail questionnaires importance of hogs in area 1 make it more desirable for breeding h0g3 to move direct from farm to farm rather than through auctions, thus elimin- ating the risks of disease and mixed breeding which may accompany dis- posal through auction markets. Nothing can be stated with any degree of certainty concerning the other markets, except that they are of lesser and varied importance. ’r --o-.o--. M . -..... mun-map... ...-.. 74 Chapter V MOVEMENTS OF SHEEP AND LAMBS TO INITIAL.MLRKETS ' Relative mrtance 2;: the Market Classes 35 Sheep and Lambs ' 32 Livestock Marketing areas Considerable differences exist among the livestock areas of the state in the relative importance of the three market classes of sheep (slaughter, stockers and feeders, and breeding). It is necessary therefore to give some attention to these differences before attempting to ascribe economic significance to the movements of sheep to the initial market outlets. Slaughter §hg_p. Eighty-nine per cent of all sheep reported sold by sampled farms in the entire state were slaughter sheep. From the sample, taking cognizance of its reliability, it is probably safe to state that a somewhat larger prOportion (91 per cent from.the sampled farms) of all sheep sold from farms in area 1 are slaughter sheep, while lesser prOportions are slaughter sheep in areas 2 and 3. (See Table l7and Fig.23 ). Stocker and Feeder Sheep. Six per cent of all sheep reported sold by sampled farms in the entire state were stocker and feeder sheep. It is probable that a smaller prOportion of all sheep are sold as feeders and stockers in the southern areas than in other areas of the state. Breeding §hggp, The generalizations stated above as applicable to stacker and feeder sheep are applicable in a slightly more accentuated form in the case of breeding sheep. The relatively large production of feed grains in area 1 and the relatively large production of pastureage and roughage in area 2 make it advantageous far farmers in area 2 to produce stockers and feeders, and for farmers in area 1 to Produce slaughter sheep. is more purchased feeder sheep are fattened in area 1, a relatively smaller prOportion of total sales consist of sheep for breeding purposes. Another factor accounting for the high prOportion of slaughter sheep in Michigan is lb. fact that most of the sheep are of a mutton or dual PurP°9° tYP°' 75 II--.‘ .‘s) l l.’ U " (a ‘ A i -.4 . || r . D... . . \.- . ht, ... ..J J. . O r a ‘ ) not ‘/ (L3 76 waweoosm mumxoo.m can howemm mo.n%flmaw - - ... o .- a . y .. .1 q. . . -.. no-p...z. ,2: - .-r ; - 1 ¢.-, .~ a, ‘ d w a t . umwaosmoack ..e.‘ .4..- ..I- . I.: .9 V4.“ n. . . .L..1.;os :rIt.ei~...; tax}. I. .P .....vl.v.r......._vtswr has..- ”new... . ., .. 32‘ ... k- .. R a I I . . v . 9 III. .fi’ _ N [I . I . of f . . - s! A ..‘4.WM.M.(* t L . ..Ip‘. . .4.I| \Al’h v t.‘ .s. . at)... .. t .6 n .12.,” 4.....‘9 1...... .. ..I M. . {In w... no ' final... Ann. I 6 9‘4. . y. .I . - in! \t , \ _ _ \I _ ~ . l _ _ . r . a o)“. .|9¢".ll.\ l. 3 . I g .I _W' .‘H‘ ..i‘ .-.\ I | I... we”. l ‘H. I “I 1‘1 ”It: .6....nhflm W. . whar . . .14. r. . h... »-\Mlu..-.-. _ . Jab. _ . s . .Itllar. .lI ..te h u. ...UV.\“.I.V. II. I; .‘ . .J JAM“. “Wag-U . . 5,. r. We 7 L .m‘. . , ~Ju ..W. ”*"F. I‘d-II ‘M‘ 4" w.- “v“? be \.e.el. ‘1. .s .. , . r: {itineraé .Ni“.\l if Belay ”fisfi." en‘glu . .fivi.. 6| ....-s .. . iridiungv . nU§§W lu.‘ . scam eouoxame enema use moons Hauoa om .Ozma .aamMnorr .mwwac he .maamm mama wwwao some moans acmapccoamm mo as seine hanks} 5.. kn. Aramav canddoa: 84: m 77 Inter-Area Differences in Movements 93; Sheep and Lambs throug Initial Market Outlets. '21 Market Classes The scattered nature of sheep production as a farm enterprise is indicated by the fact that only 295 of the 1515 farms sampled in this study reported sheep sold. The fact that these 295 farms reported a total of 15,015 sheep sold is indicative of the concentration of sheep production in the hands of larger producers. Although it is known that this sample is biased upde it is significant as an indication of concentration to note that the 25 farms selling over 99 head of slaughter sheep per year accounted for 7,353 of the 13,323 slaughter sheep marketed by the 295 sampled farms reporting sheep sold. (See liable 18). Slaughter Sheep. As a result of tabulating the sample data to show the per- centage importance of each of the alternative initial market outlets to casual, medium sized commercial. and carlot producers}! for each area and for the state as a whole, Figures 2h, 25, and 26. were constructed showing, graphically, the relative importance of the alternative market outlets to the different sized producers in the three areas. Figure 27 is the composite picture for the state as a whole. In all areas where any validity can be attached to the findings and for the entire state the data supports the following generalizations: (1) relevant to the prOportional initial utilization, larger producers as a group sell larger prOportions of their slaughter sheep to terminal markets; (2) relevant to the proportional utilization of local assembling markets, (including concentration yards. dealers, local c00peratives and auctions). the larger producers as a group sell less of their slaughter sheep to assembling markets; and (3) relevant to the utilization of packing plants and local butchers as an initial market outlet. a variable relationship exists between size of producer and percentage utilization. 17 In reference to sheep producers: 1. A casual producer is defined as a producer who either did not market any sheep or who sold less than 20 slaughter sheep during the year. 2. A medium-sized commercial producer is defined as a producer who sold 20-99 head of slaughter sheep during the year. 3. A carlot producer is defined as a producer who sold 100 or more slaughter sheep during the year. 78 .. .. a a .. a a a 8.04.. confided“. \wu .. a a a a .. a .. 3H ucdddodn \W . . . . . . . . «on noupaona \m. .330 pong had a.“ .32. noon: on 3.3.390." as.“ «mm .35."qu \fl 33.50335“. 38” 33 398% new» 50. wm.m om.m mm.m «H.m >¢.m om.wm mmma Hmmmmryunn omm¢ om.a HH.»H hm.na >H.mfl mm.“ mm.oH b».nn amfl mm hope 33 mm.» 8&H 93 85m 8...” 2.3 8.3 $31 mmméfi a damage“: «03: .3 ohm?" ono . l H a m u p T 2 . 0 mm hope . om mm mm «m.mm pm mm na.na H mm.0m 2 . $6..” 32% BB. m 3.9. mmfi moo.” mmcmm Cum ¢mo>w mm mm .3455. now an.. mmo¢a 0H1HH. mm.m¢ db.mw mm mmION mmm moon mnvwbfl o¢.m “vm H¢ ovom 23mg” #mmh l. E m «084 11 o 3:: ma.m 3.3” mad nm.m 00.9.... mm mm homo. «mm mm.“ mo.»H m¢.¢a so.¢fi mm.m an.HH ”a.wn pm moo¢ . . . . . . mmuom Se 8:... $3 2 m 8 «N S v mm 3 5 mm :3 \m I 0an H .6084 Ho pnoo ham ongoo pom moo pom» pnoo gem £80 gmm ammo new #30 pom gongz Illlfiipnoo hmm 8A 22.30 Shun .653.» 3935 3313: H.000." 3323 mg.“ cacaoll a 3:3 300....» .3 ed: .8 .mooo M093 .3 353 .3 3.3% 3.35m mo and 33on in”. o .3 _ anon—kg unofiwoad Hdooq 93.539 wntflwomm noprupnooqoo Hanan—hoe hoe—52 offi .gmgog .393 ha. .98.“ non vac» nmnazn .3 63.33.30 33.50 ...I 3.3735 mo 093. £060 smacks». 30m mmupnmgom «moosm novnwafiam .3” cannon r) 79 ..IdHO OCHKII_hII_Id.‘HOI “CIA. a..lldflhflfiflh IIEAGWNNN umuwccco.awmao mez mam 839:. ”Spam - aawhsm , w.» $72 . 9350 mwam .3 $30 Hogs 35:5 Manon um 33.83 no m: mun“. minus... 4.33 u- mumamwm madam. ...... 3: > 335 _f .. ....3- ... . ~ . M f «w... :.ch ...—trinéfimr _ . u . I . r ' «VLF: .‘vlvumwm “0“ COM mm 0 ~ 7 . +£39.14... leyw. ‘rfiéfivmi‘.’ - ...... ...... .2... .....wz ...- .. ... ms, ......flkkm rum “mania-TA Ammv mm ..n...w>O m. . W , w r w ...v. . . $3: .. ..- . 23 $48 . m. _ m . ... w 2.3 o Ego o _Mm M nu mamam «a.» “on ooH mm my go on cHom .oz 5%: .H de< .chh 0mm 80.5 .235 nun Each. .39 0H9. 5.3.59: 3 M5382. 3.328 33.33:: £395» 32 9.92:. 32%.»? mo micuatuué . .3 0.53m a: oeuwm mng¢m mywmo» 6250 «03.3: had 3 30. noon- on genome.“ .5.» non .3324. one Have «HO mhmdfimwbo. mmuwxsnovummnd gum: mama "acknom meflhm: mpmxgaz . a cam . no wn U3 mm .m M .omawuvw Hm“ mm“ amhfim Mufim% ...... .1.r..~.h. . ... . . s . ... .Jrui...“ ,. . .... Ill . 1H. .I. (17.39. . . ~ I 1% ......JJuHYJ “Wm? a — ..I ...JO . . m... ...-.. am. _ . . .. ‘ 1 . . . .u .l'. .IVHI‘ n. ham mu ..4&.- Q U Q a. . ummwnnmouwm om mm o _ . ...... . .... bani.) .4.... . .. . - .. 1... an or If . A . .. . n. ......nfi W9 wwqmswflafitfis; ...). .-...... . - . 9...... .. .... : ... .w - {4-11%. . ....»J,......!.. a . A ..I. . -\.......W,,u.. ...d.\..o..h“fl..:;rv......cm.¢i-, .. . I s. (a... Yl11045u.$ nit. 2.”me .‘SW 7 I x... m .. $71.31.... .....rfi: .. . «a. rim» .. ... .1... i .. so“. y... 7%.... ...... hm...» ,_ .. . - AM mm hop . L.-5HK&.. ...d...u2.......wi)i . 7: ... . o I I I I u I, I I I I i I I I I I . z. (fifmuflésb $3.17 ..7.. . Inn). {PH r. , .. .I . .finfldfir. . . . . . w w . L . .vvs . . ... ~ . . i .> .J§H.PV ..W‘ n .. . r. .. . . - : . . .....r...»....h Emir . Aamv mmnom ¢.,£s-r........._..w.y. (J "V O OHIO nil-vii... .. .. uh . . 7v menah sum» awn nHom .02 upmauso opnaaquouflm nwfiohnp uHom wpewH can Ammnw Hausa swam mo owmpnooumm . um 0&0 .02 onma .m dvud .meach mm: Bonn oudmnm 81 .23.? cog baa .3 can. moon. on an.“ 3.28 E53 3 a: a: 3 8t 4: cheapo onm no .aooo xudaa mucxam Hmucq ho «zwmmmdfl no hmfihm: :owwumd “moon he muwflmwm uuwuoum om» guano .pcc.wanJ . k a n o . 1 pl . . . . . . .vq. -LFJIflLILMfiQW? ,1... ...... . q \WII'! mu Q NV 0 .U Q mwmcucaohsm H Om w n O L} ... . .4. 4 . 1 .‘Il maaao mwmu Rom ampuopmk mcoz a. v n .. .. . 14...... .. 7-. :.. .V‘ .. (hm. . 53.73... ... . rnifirxf L . ... lava... u . lvh. sib- .o:mH .m 424 .253 oi 38m touch album 33 .3303. nonfimuno«amwnd Ham: mama ”mouaom hex on mm umpo 3v mmuom and o 3.0 mehwh hum» hum no .02 uHom .oz . oufiwam naoaufio opuaazhoufic gmaoaza naou mpsms can mesw umpnmzcam Ho mwumanmoumm. .om 82 Dkwfio ho awahdh ...—33qu .31.... «3.3: ha 5 So. moon: on E38: can 83 33:33:30 35.. man“ «coupon mapwm 30m no 33.82 09000 Wkwg MOE-H WUGCE GOHH05< HGUOQ 3.32m: 303 .3 33?" TI , no wnmamwm mcuxumm .ovh .onoo HanHEAme r , .. ... u w . — . .- . ..............,...n.fl..mu._..t.)}.n.1un . . . ,. * “0“ u m .... Q . u m m chGOOhom 00 cm H mN Om mm 0 .... . . - 33 mm 2.5 .o ..I . . II .._ - x fin . . , :33 $6.... p .7 v I I .. , .. / ---. w swimWnfl. -. _ . “$53... $6 .\ g . u. . - . ... . neuah .30» you _ I. o _ a m L. ,. ...- :3 gitgma .6.— 33 6: KM (U T“ n . on? .cmmEuF 6de 88% ..mea hog sum.“ #5.. 32 .8358 3 . wcwuuoooa. m>4pm¢kepaa nwfiouau v.3m mnaaa cam Qmwnm Amunwfiwam ho mucanwoamm 0 kW oaawwh 84 It can be seen from.the above generalizations that inter-area differences in markets utilized for all slaughter sheep are probably quite dependent upon the prOportional importance of the different sized producers; hence, bias as to size of producer in the sample effects the degree to which sample percentages represent their purported pepulations. Inter-area differences in the utilization of markets for the 13,323 slaughter sheep reported sold from.the 295 sampled farms can be noted from Table 19 , or from the graphic presentation in Figures 28, 29, and 30. Table 19. Percentages of slaughter sheep sold to alternative markets from 295 farms, by areas, Michigan, 1940. .dreas .larkets ' Michigan "'I!B§"I‘ 1:35‘2: ‘ifEE'S"“' Per cent Per cent gg£_cent Per cent Terminal markets T67. 76 7.8.11 38.75 177.43 Concentration yards 8.30 8.58 1.79 71.56 Packing plantl 6 e57 7 e1? 3.55 "-'"' Dealers 14.86 12.82 30.69 6.42 Local COOperatives 11.23 10.94 14.19 ----- Auction 11e27 11040 11.05 .... Farmers 1.01 .98 .96 4.59 TGtals 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Number of sheep equal to 100 per cent 13325 11550 1564 109 Source: 1515 nail questionnaires. Comparisons between northern and southern areas vith reference to any single market outlet are of little value because the sample size for the Upper Peninsula is quite inadequate; however, the data for areas 1 and 2 have a fair degree of reliability which will permit certain comparisons to be made as follows on an inter- aree basis: (1) terminal markets, concentration.yards, and packing plants ears of more importance as initial market outlets for slaughter sheep in area 1 than in area 2; (2) dealers and local cooperatives acre probably more important as initial market outlets for slaughter sheep in area 2 than in area 1; and, (3) little can.be stated relevant to the inter-area hmportance of auctions and farmers as initial market outlets for slaughter sheep. 35 easemenOstmac Hang mama m mgem sebum we miss muouhmfi no sense sham no .mooo house «scans Macon no change . gasses; :0305. 303 so anagram wagons .3. £500 Hauaaaee é. .. , .. ....{mu pageguzmfl. ~ * hem _ 1 ... ...? 2...- ...... 2m: aunwtxnsiw my "a mu no .u n. Ga newmusmoesm ,1 . - ,.. w. ..., 3. isxxmew, , - ‘- -taflflifi..f.h. :w m, ..H“... - x . ..\ \| - up a in mm o uuoaaoo opaaaouosae museums .ozma .H none .naaca mmm acne caow anew.” use neenm .3 means some no weumucmosem mmuhfiom an 39.93 amxocwm new amnmmam amsnmaaam . mm 0.2% a 86 . .ooso . mm: “macawpwmdd Mama 9%: . om . eEem sesame Sena an 3 scream wsemno warm no anooo Moshe mesmfim arsed so ofiaown 7 . v x t .2 .r.. we escaemm cowpom< Hmong, no maeHmeQ mamfiwrhl .mM .uego Ha:.ewiw m h. - _ _ . ‘ hex I'll a, D14? JRLK Dbl! . u. -o o. ...m m t nonmucmosem 8!! 3 8 mm. Lie. -.. . .. -m . . A maaameau N 1 in. .P I\. .\ \1111 ...-Ll {Uli\x-\ \w 11 \I ...... ... ..I. \l x u...“ g‘ifi‘” ...... \\ \ il‘liulu-liiluleinn‘.\u|\|‘\ui\filtl\\\n \ .4 [urllrlull I. In... ‘ II II LI‘II‘tjti‘.‘ I. \| .W \ m ~ amuse“ b can kdxooum . w \ In \V l1 \\ \\ e‘ \\ s \ x \ \ \ \ \ v“ \\ \x. \ \‘ ‘ ‘0 \l \I. \ \ \ \\ |\u I\ 1“ Iv \ s. | \\ kmuflwfim Hm .u .w » nu W mum M «x . , w a co“ m~ om mm oozma .m mea< .sumw ma: scam upwasso e>wpwnaesam museums omen mean“ was momma Ho wmmHo some mo wmmmpamoeem . mm one» 3 87 seawe=:0uuwomd Mama mama o How he .nooo gonna muneam Heooq he swappm ‘80 mnwfihah flowoufid HGOQH ho whmflmwa MG “Madam cw.» oUflOO Man «8th AN 1U mg m\ nemavnoOhcm 03 BMW om . mm o \l I... .... .....\\ III. I.‘ ll... \ \ z ... \ nil in 11’ \ “ III I'll .— \ \ ...I I! 1| 1‘! I... iv; / N H I ..I I. ... i /L o, d ., m a del 1mfi< om mm o 9mm." .m 3.; 66.2% 05595 mooauso eswpcmscaam nmpoeza mace ansea use amaze Mo «made some Ho senesceoumm ”eonsom hem wfiwuemuu heroesm use seamen seummnmam .ndnufiemfi 88 neuronsownmcsd :5... mama «coupe» wcssm a . weakens spouses no sense oamw so .mooo uehdm gonna mpqaam Hmoog so euupom «seesaw newsodd Moved ho mnswrxm wadxuxm can” .umnmw Mwnmunm4 _ , . . 1 , a A has 5 w . If .39.». 6.. ... a n w l km. 0. O m t eemmofieosem con as am - my .. - .... w - ... . ., Mauvmonfl .u .L l. ..Ile...“ i. ... .1. A I“ liaise! “hal‘IIl ‘ ‘v ..I. III Inal \I‘HIA‘ ‘4. \\\\ \\ II \- ‘ ids! III \\ W . lotuflb - - _ . Vet nausea \LVI“ \\H\\\U ‘\\HH\I‘\\ .\\.\|\|\1 / . II.‘ .II \ I! t!‘ .|\.\\ ‘ifia‘ / I‘ 0‘ ‘.\ ‘ III \.\ .‘e I“ \I / l.lr\ .l‘ . ‘ _loenlrl... ..I. has: . noonwsaam t L . . :‘1H..3 . . a ......me nu .hw .Mv mw fix 8.. mm 3 mm . .ozma .neasnoaz .maaau mama acne euwHuSO opfiaemheeaa mmnosmu mace wear“ one amaze me mmmHo more we memmuumoaca (a . Hm whamrn 89 It is probably safe to assert that the local assembling markets, (including dealers, auctions, concentration yards, and local cosperatives), are of greater importance in the more northern areas as initial market outlets for slaughter sheep. Proximity to the terminal markets of Detroit, Chicago, and Toledo provides at least a partial explanation of greater utilization of these markets in area 1. The widely scattered nature of sheep production in area 2 accounts for the prominence of local concentrating markets, especially in the case of dealers. Lack of local consumer demand offers an economic explanation for the small prOportions going to the local slaughter markets in all areas. Utilization of the alternative market outlets for all the slaughter sheep reported sold in the entire sample is graphically presented in Figure 31. 0f the total of 13,323 slaughter sheep sold, 47 per cent was sold to the terminal markets, most important of which was Detroit. Dealers, local cOOperatives, and auctions were of secondary importance, taking from 11 to 15 per cent each. Concentration yards took 8 per cent, while direct sales to packing plants accounted for 7 per cent. The large prOportion of slaughter sheep moving to terminal markets initially, without going through local assembling markets, is attributable to the concentration of the sheep business in the hands of large producers who are in a position to make direct carload shipments to terminal yards;£/ luportance of the assembly function tends to be minimized by production in larger lots. as a result of being well adapted to perform the assembling function in the two northern areas where production occurs in small widespread lots, dealers afford the most important outlet of the local assembling markets in the state as a whole. M 29 Stocker £93.23 Table 20 and Figures 28, 29, 30, and 31 present the proportional importance of each of the markets for stocker and feeder sheep to sampled farms in the different areas and in the state. It should be recalled that as indicated in Figure 23, stocker and feeder sheep sales are of greater prOportional Eyihe 25 largest producers in this sample sold 7,353 of 13,323 slaughter sheep reported sold from.all the 1515 farms. importance in the two northern areas than in area 1. 90 Table 20. Percentages of feeder and stacker sheep sold through alternative market outlets from 295 farms, by areas, Michigan, 1940 Areas Markets Michigan Area 1 use? Area 3 Per cent Per cent Per cent Per cent Terminal markets , . . “—197.57 Concentration yards 12.50 8.88 29.25 -..--- Packing plants 2,23 3,05 --..-- ...--- Dealers 25.45 20.52 25.00 60.86 Local COOperatives 4.45 5.97 -..--- -..--- “0151011 9.88 6.70 23.94 ----- Farmers 34.53 39.88 18.52 19.57 Tetals 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 number of sheep equal to 100 per cent 921 687 188 46 Source: 1515 mil questionnaires. Relevant to the inter-area importance of initial market outlets for feeder and stacker sheep, the following may be stated: (1) auctions were probably of greater importance in area 2, than in any other areas; and (2) dealers were probably more important in the two northern areas than in area 1. read supplies are more widespread or accessible to farmers in the south than in the north, which accounts for the greater farm-to-farm movement of the producer classes of sheep in the south. Likewise, the meagerness of feed grain supplies in the north probably is a strong factor causing proportionally larger numbers of the producer classes to move initially to the local clearing point market outlets where they can be sold to inter- and intro-area buyers. Combining the area data to secure percentages for the state, it is found that of the 921 stacker and feeder sheep reported sold from the sampled farms, 35 per cent was sold from farm to farm. markets. Packing plants took the remaining 2 per cent. Forty-six per cent was sold to local clearing point Evidently the two main movements are from farm to farm and from farm to dealers, although direct shipments to terminals and sales to concentration yards are also of considerable prOportions. 91 Breedigg(8heep. .Again it is praper to pay attention to the inadequacies of the sample on which the percentages are based before drawing conclusions in regard to the inter-area importance of the outlets as markets for breeding sheep. Valid conclusions can probably be drawn as follows: (1) larger prOportions of breeding sheep were sold to farmers in the two northern areas than in area 1; (2) terminal markets as an initial outlet for breeder sheep were used only in area 1; and (3) auctions were probably of greater importance in area 2 than in other areas. Table 21. Percentages of breeding sheep sold to alternative ' markets from 1515 farms, by areas, Michigan, 1940. Area markets Michigan Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Per cent Per cent Per cent Per cent Concentration yards .64 1.04 ----- ----- Dealers 2.08 3.33 ----- ----- local COOperatives 1.69 1.87 1.68 ----- Auction 4.15 .21 13.03 ----- _ggmmers 81.58 77.75 85.29 100.00 Tetals 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Number of sheep equal to 100 per cent 771 481 238 52 Source: 1515 mail questionnaires. Combination of the area data to secure state percentages indicating the relative importance of the alternative market outlets resulted in the figures presented in Table 21 above and in Figure 31. 0f the 771 breeding sheep reported sold by the sampled farms in the entire state, 82 per cent were sold direct from farm.to farm. Local clearing point markets (inclusive of auctions, concentration yards, and dealers) took only 7 per cent, while 11 per cent (probably including some culls) moved to terminal clearing point markets. The small numerical and prOportional trade in breeding sheep, the difficulty of Judging quality and age in breeding sheep, and their small unit value tend to account for the importance of the farmeto-farm.movement in contrast to movement to other market outlets. 92 Chapter '71 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Large inter-area differences in the utilization of initial market outlets for livestock from Michigan farms tend to nullify the value of figures representing the entire state; that is, a more adequate description results from a discussion of utilization by livestock species and areas than from a consideration of state wide figures. It is with this thought in mind that the advantages of very concise sumarizations are sacrificed to the extent of offering inter-area differences as explanations of state figures presented in this chapter. Figure 32 is, in a sense, a statistical sumary of the whole study in that it represents a combination of all preceding data showing differences in initial market outlets utilized, by areas, by market classes, and size of producer for the state of Michigan. It should be recalled at this point that two biases exist in the data on which this study is based: (1) the suple contains a disprOportionate number of large livestock producing farms, and (2) areas 2 and 3 are overweighted in the sample, especially in the case of hogs and cattle. Thus, in view of these limitations of the data, conclusions as to actual percentage importance will not be advanced in this chapter other than as indicated in the aforementioned figure. Relative mportance _o_f_ Different Market Outlets for Different Species. Terminal markets, it will be observed from Figure 32 , were of greater importance as an initial market for sheep than for cattle and hogs. The principal explanations of this difference between sheep and the other two species lie in the concentration of sheep feeding in the hands of a relatively few large producers, and the lack of a local slaughter demand for lambs and mutton. Concentration yards and auctions were of greater importance as initial market outlets for hogs than for either sheep or cattle. In area 1 dealers are of lesser proportional importance for all species, and concentration yards and auctions relatively more important, than in areas 2 and 3. Moreover, in area 1 a greater 93 - ‘w \ s . _. . "oohsom . maaagmofimdg Sex mama mnnmm eaohom mosaics 38282 a w .3 was mwm 3mm so omooo Susan. 3de Heoag no 0.395 .r was... I scanned mono.“ as unease: washroom .63. .8800 mmnmnhwm. _" ., ... .. . o Is . . v 4 . . . .. .. . I Gem/4.hs.r.t..|.lflu.mqwnnfl. 3. 4 .» . . . .. . . , _ “a“ w u to o Q Q m 4 ecumomooamm 0M. R “U D .. ._ - £23 _ a. . runawem.“ use macaw ....Hn . . Pure . L}. , .l'n‘k‘o 1 'l I / I / . If I / I I. .l I . . z . / / I . a , . New... . 4. 3E , - ”.....w a . rm“? dam swam . a. , r o s I , , . / / / _ . . .. 4 . 1. r! tiara... ... Iv. - a v V. a e. .. at.» a. ...... m _ sesame fries . 5.3%...” ... . ‘13.. - - - . cum 0.3va . me ”a me me .n my fix «ca. me n mm 0 sea.“ Senses 333.231 £385 38 Museums: .«o .osma .eamaaows .aaama mama «enemas name no nommuncoacm .. Mm .93qu 9.1+ prOportion of hogs than of cattle are marketed. Hence, it follows as indicated by the data for the state as a whole that prOportionally more hogs than cattle will be sold through auctions and concentration yards,since cattle are more evenly distributed throughout the'state. Sheep production on the other hand is concentrated in the hands of a relatively few large producers who favor the terminal markets. This fact rules out a comparison of sheep with hogs and cattle on the basis of differences in geographic distribution. .L greater prOportion of cattle than of hogs are produced in the northern areas where dealers and truck buyers play a prominent role. Hence, as borne out by the data, dealers constitute a more important outlet for cattle than for other livestock when the state is considered as a whole. Local cooperatives are of greater importance as an initial market outlet for sellers of sheep than for sellers of hogs and cattle. This.may be due in part to the fact that a larger prOportion of sheep than of other livestock are slaughtered at terminal points, so that there has been a greater tendency to continue the use of cooperative shipping associations for marketing sheep. market channels other than direct shipment to terminals and through local cooperatives are of less importance for sheep and lambs than for the other species. In area 1 a larger prOportion of the livestock reported sold to packing plants is sold to the terminal packers at Detroit than in other areas. (is a larger proportion of the hogs marketed in Huchigan is produced in area 1 than is the case for the other species, packing plants are thus more important for hogs than for other species when the state is considered as a whole; also, lack of local consumer demand for lamb and.mntton:minimizes the sale of sheep and lambs to local packers. Farmers or others act as buyers of cattle and calves to a greater extent than in the case of h0gs and pigs or sheep and.1ambs. Several factors affecting farmer Purchases of feeder and breeding stock offer plausible explanations of this situation. is prOportionally few hogs are needed as a breeding stock foundation, there is a smaller breeding hog trade prOportional to all hogs sold than in the case 95 of cattle. also, since few farmers produce feeder sheep for sale and since feeder sheep are purchased mainly from out of state breeders, trade in native feeder and breeding sheep is of insignificant proportion. rectors Influencig Relative Utilization 23 Initial 33% Outlets. Among the general factors influencing the prOportional utilization of market outlets are: (1) size of producer, (2) geographic location of the area concerned in respect to terminal markets, (3) species sold, (4) market class sold, (5) relation of total local production to demand of local slaughter markets, (5) available foodstuffs, and (7) population density of each species. Considerable evidence as to the affect of size of producer on.market utilization fer slaughter animals has been brought out in this study. In almost all cases where a degree of validity can be ascribed to the sample data it was found that a direct relationship existed between the number of livestock produced per farm and the prOportion of slaughter livestock, regardless of species, sold to terminal markets. in inverse relationship exists between the number of livestock produced per farm and the proportion of slaughter livestock sold to local assembling markets. In general the greater the distance from terminal markets the smaller the prOportion of livestock sold direct to terminal markets and the greater the proportion sold to local assembling markets. The relative mmportance of the various initial market outlets as associated with the species of livestock sold has been discussed in the preceding section of this chapter. Slaughter classes of livestock are sold to these markets facilitating movements to the ultimate slaughterer, while producer classes of livestock evidently move into the more complex:marksting channels only as supplies exceed the ability of farmers to deal directly with each other. Large supplies of foodstuffs increase the demand for feeding, breeding, and dairy animals, thus bringing about movements of these animals in such volume as to necessitate the use of the compleximarketing channels. Shortage of fattening 96 feedstuffs or the production of excess supplies of roughages necessitates the use of the complex markets to move excesses of the producer classes of livestock to other areas. a lack of local demand for the meat of a given species causes greater proportions of the slaughter animals of that species to be sold direct “to terminals or through assembling markets rather than to local slaughter markets. Donsity of papulation of a species brings about increased utilization of the more complex marketing channels for all species and market classes. Position _o_1" Terminal mrkets 3.9. 22. Initial p_u_tl_e_t_. is indicated by this study the seven alternative market outlets, arranged in order of their probable proportional importance, for each species, are as follows: Cattle Hogs Sheep 1. Dealers 1. Terminal Markets 1. Terminal Markets 2. Terminal Markets 2. Packing Plants 2. Dealers 3. Farmers 3. Auctions 3. Auctions 4. Auctions 4. Concentration Yards 4. Local COOperatives 5. Concentration Yards 5. Dealers 5. Packing Plants 6. Packing Plants 6. Farmers 6. Farmers 7. Local Cooperatives 7. Local CoOperatives 7. concentration Yards Ihile the Detroit terminal market occupies a position of major importance as an ultimate market for Michigan livestock, it should not be stated that it is the major initial market. Despite the statewide influence of the Detroit terminal market, quite important movemnts of livestock do occur whose only connection with the Detroit market is through the price structure. These movements are: (l) movements of slaughter livestock to interior packers and local slaughters; (2) movements of live- stock to markets outside of Michigany and (3) farm to farm and farm to local clearing point movements of the producer classes of livestock. More important than initial movements of livestock to terminal markets or initial movements to out of state markets is the initial movement of livestock to ‘f‘ JEnnples of these markets are Chicago, Ft. Wayne, Toledo, Cincinnati, and Buffalo which serve southern Michigan farmers. Green Bay is another out of state market and is important in the Upper Peninsula. 97 local agencies such as auctions, concentration yards, dealers, and local cooperatives which act as intermediaries between producer and producer, or between producer and terminals or local slaughterers, depending upon whether the livestock under consideration are producer or slaughter animals. it this point a reconciliation of the above conclusions regarding the importance of terminal and local market agencies with those drawn by 1". A. You in his llaeter's 8 thesis , I'liurketing Michigan Livestock,"{s in order. On this point the following paragraph may be quoted from Yoss' conclusions: 'In 1937 a representative group of Michigan producers marketed over 70 per cent of their livestock through the terminal market in Detroit. It is apparent from this that this institution serves as the hub of the state 's marketing system. Ranking below the terminal market in the proportion of stock handled were the auction markets ('7 per cent), the local dealers (7 per cent), the packing houses (6 per cent), and the concentration yards (5 per cent). Least popular were the local butchers and truckers at the farm; the producers contacted in the study selling only 1 to 2 per cent of their livestock through each of these agencies." (Thesis, pp. loo-101). Examination of the sample on which the above conclusions are based will indicate that the sample is composed primarily of large producers. Thus, in view of the tendency of large producers to sell greater proportions of their livestock directly to terminal markets as revealed in the present study, the above conclusions are very understandable. In this respect the Voss sample was very similar to the sample gathered by the field representative in the 1940 Michigan survey, which because of 3 its bias, was not used in this study. The above quoted conclusions should be considered as applicable to an undefinable group of larger Michigan livestock producers. Conclusions based on the present study should be considered as applicable to a rather poorly defined group of small medium 4 to large Michigan livestock producers J O 0 ii Harketing Michigan Livestock: A Survey of Transportation Trends and mrket Outlets," submitted as n. A. thesis, Department of Economics, Michigan State College, 1940. K as above, pp.h,19. mute See Chapter 2 as an aid in defining the group of farmers represented in the present study. 98 Some Methodological Conclusions. A few conclusions of a statistical nature can be drawn from the present study which may be of value to subsequent researchers contemplating sampling of Michigan farms. They may be stated as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. Random selection of mailing lists from Agricultural adjustment Administration comnitteemen or cooperators is a questionable procedure if the object is to secure a sample representative of all farms as to number of livestock sold per year. The upward bias as to number of livestock sold per year found in the combined sainple resulting from the above method of sampling was most prominent in the case of cattle and calves. For sheep and lambs the bias was of some importance but not as important as lack of a sufficient number of observations. For hay and pigs the bias found in the combined samples was insignificant. Samples secured by random selection of mailing lists from an committeemen contained an upward bias in relation to samples secured by random selection of mailing lists from m cooperators. This bias was most noticeable in the case of sheep, less noticeable in the case of hogs, and insignificant in the case of cattle. The author respectfully refers subsequent researchers who are concerned with securing representative percentages by sampling to Table h , page 27. 99 BIBLIOGRAPHY Dowell,.A. A. and BJorka, Knute: Livestock Mbrketi , MbGraw- Hill, First Edition, 19:1. 534 pages. Harper, F. A.: Analyzing Data for Relationships, Cornell 'University Agricultural Experiment Station, Memoir 231, June 1940. 14 pages. Hill, E. 3.: (Types of Farming in Michigan. Michigan State College Agricultural Experiment Station, Special Bulletin 206, (Revised) June 1939. 99 pages. Pearson, Karl: The Grammar of Science. 2nd Edition, London 1900. Sarle, C. 3.: .Adquagy and Reliability of erpeyield Estimates, ‘United States Department of Agriculture, Technical Bulletin No. 311, June 1932. 137 pages. Sarle, C. F.: Reliability and Adequacy of PIPEPPIICO Data, united States Department of Agriculture, Bulletin 1480. 66 pages. Voss, F. A.: Marketing Michigan Livestock: A.Survey of Transportation Trends and market Outlets, master's Thesis, Michigan State College, 1940. - Reference Book of the Meat Industry, American Meat Institute, Department of Public Relations, 59 E. van Buren St., Chicago. 64 pages. - Agricultural statistics, united.states Department of .Agriculture, 1940. APPENDIXMA The questionnaire on page 101 is the questionnaire mailed to the agricultural adJustmsnt administration cooperators and committeemen. 100 m .l I L i ll ‘11} UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Bureau of Agricultural Economics 101 ' in cooperation with Michigan Agricul ural Ex eriment Station Agricultural Econom cs Section LIVESTOCK MARKETING—FARM SCHEDULE Name Post Office County Acres operated Acres owned. Acres rented from others 1. Number of head of livestock SOLD through each of the following in 1940: ‘Terminal Concentration Dealers Local Auctions Farmers Species Packing public yards or cn-truck coop. or sale or and class markets locgl;markets plants bu ers ass'ns barns others ____Number ___.Number W Num— W’Tiulnhm‘ m um er Cattle Q calves Slaughter Veal calves Stacker & feeder Dairy & breeding meme. pigs Slaughter Feeder Breeding Sheep & lambs Slaughter Feeder Breeding 2. Number of head of livestock BOUGHT through each of the following in 1940: . Coop. Concentra- Auctions Species nggiggl degengée: tionlyagds Deglers a: Fagmers and class istr u — or cc 5 e markets in direct markets truckers barns ranchers Number umber _Number ‘Number Number Number Cattle &_calves Stocker & feeder Dairy & breeding Enemies Feeder Breeding Sheep & lambs Feeder Breeding 5. How many times did you sell livestock of each s ecies in 1940? (a) Cattle (b) Calves (c Hogs (d) Sheep 4. How many times did you buy stocker and feeder livestock of each species in 1940? (a) Cattle (b) Calves (c) Hogs (d) Sheep 5. 0f the livestock sold in 1940, how many head were moved from the farm as follows: Hess Sheen a In your own trucks b By truckers you hired a By the buyer 6. What do you consider to be your most important problem when marketing livestock? ;ELIT—266 . ?l B I B II B III B IV' B'V B VI B VII B VIII 102 APPENDIX B Supplementary Tables Percentage of livestock sold through various types of outlets by 956 farmers in area 1, classified by species and classes, 1940. Percentage of livestock sold through various types of outlets by farmers in area 2, classified by species and classes, 1940. Percentage of livestock sold through various types of outlets by 140 farmers in area 3, classified by species and classes, 1940. Percentage of livestock sold through various types of outlets by 1515 farmers in Michigan, classified by species and classes, 1940. Percentages of slaughter livestock sold through each type of outlet in area 1, classified by number sold per farm for each species, 1940. Percentages of slaughter livestock sold through each type of outlet in area 2, classified by number sold per farm for each species, 1940. Percentages of slaughter livestock sold through each type of outlet in area 3, classified by number sold per farm for each species, 1940. Percentage of slaughter livestock sold through each type of outlet classified by number sold per farm.for each species, Michigan, 1940. ‘41 ‘v I”! H) vs .«\ .1;- U ('1) (71 .L wt‘l ' A.. f live— t 081‘ can C) CH {_\- 0‘: 03 La 1985 (A) 481 O 10 d) .~4 H («'5 H L") N to H U3b3r+r+ C) p4 Q) 51' g : . r“! r-i ,0 O O O 1 4: O A U) H I'D +7 0-,? r29 [CE Cu If C) ’.\1 ~ CD CD 1') $4 0’) :1: L‘) <34 .‘.\1 D .. Cr. .4 0‘: (I) L\ Q) F4 1 - O o e e e s e e O O E L: Q) r.) to 20 L\ to [A] {fr v3" "3‘5 L\ O ,C: «14 '3‘.) (<2: rO I’D D- r(In +3 L: 4 C) C) CL: C0 +3 £1 (1) 3: O H m :3 g :70 (.7. H t.\ H O '7) H .H CG 0) 0 m _ no (2: L3; L1; 1—4 we ‘2‘- N +3 {1) g e e s e e s e 0 e e O p, :4 v4 H o (3‘; 0:! to to r—l LO :5 £4 :1 Cl r-4 an H r~1' H H 41.1 O 43) H4 ....) e {J (D Q) . ,r.: :3 L0 11“; C\ ‘5,“ O O) to '1'! [x L\ r4 p: .- (3 I70 1a). «,0 n) L\ C: (3‘: I) L. C) U) ‘4 0 0 e o 0 e e O . . C) Q m (13 2") LC) r—4 (13 '0 - C) 0 r4 0 O G.) {on H «J +3 (.0 13.4 (1 5.4 C) U) c) 3 ;" L; c) r—O. or :0 C) B o L\ t?) 2.11 :‘3 .r——( 94 ‘1‘) (1.1 0- xi“ Ca '0 ("U 77.) ID 113 :0 v3 +3 ;~, L.) e e e e e e e e e e b :71 C} H '0 r-4 1“ '.-'_\ I» H ._1 ’7) ;:‘_) ,3 g. :2 ,'.., (:21 r-1 r4 rflt r A r—4 :q If) 5):} +3 c: (r: C: "-4 4"“ C.‘ L: ~23 ri r7. .——«: (”.2- I’Jl 20 ‘14 [>- no r, as 1'.) C» Q) [-4 3‘6 r’J '3‘ r4 '1’) .11 ,——1' f.‘ O O I O O o O O O .14 in :1) 1‘! 04 =0 1' If) "1" D "D ‘l‘ r"! {.31 "4 r‘. U: 3') +4 as. 1:. +9 p -’.: L1 54 C: 2.. c. 3}, +3 1 z) b r": r‘ ar‘ 6) (‘3 (f3 .1) '1) <14 f: U] r'{ b- 1‘; r4; 3".) r‘4 y.) i} 1) J 1;; .4 L4 0 0 e 0 O o O O O 3) .1. .4, (I. D- ("3. <3} .1“) _’ (1") (if) I) _4 z; 1‘ ‘1’ A4 r—4 ---1 ..4 .4 <) :3 :2 r.) r-1 .4 +3 70' O U) L; ',.1 "4.! .1; N :3 r; 'L to H 1.3 H G) D H H. :1: 0 Us N u; u t~~~ u’) L\ r-‘l m .1) "1 AL) 0 e e e e e e e e s 4 :3 F4 F—e '31 7.3 2:“ ~41 ",4 L\ 1:) A") a}: “2) (I) £4'_I q) (I) «J F'J ”—4 ;\ ‘3“ H [-4 [‘4 7."; :-| F4 ', '1) <1 "5 .—4 U] -‘,) ‘ C!) -‘-) > '0 {+4 "ufz- 'J H "'_l 1: JD 0] W .14. > [.fl. r.) m it 5? £4 U) U] U '1) *4. ’;_ '1? ‘4'. £1 ..1) 'J <1) :0 +3 .11 {-4 f ---1 J 53 "4 '3 L": -r-l (If; C: O 117 :44 >1 {-4 '1", .1 L1 w—4 O 0 ‘ " ‘: :‘s (1)- H3 ((31 , 1‘ d (D ‘1‘ ‘3 r4, 6.? :4 if t: d .D ,1 rd 0) Dug :1 r 5L3W4 m ®.u :ust u j) ". ‘ H 1‘» M (,0 "4 14 <1) ~4 '3.) 14 33 if) If) :> (T) {CW ‘. ”3 a: "3' <1} =3 (’4- *5; U (j) H C) i"; r’) 103 .P r _ a . mum “n.4m no.ua ma.a no. as. . no. annotate was M).ma an.mm on. so.an on. sn..u m ma.n _ sesame «one o”. no.an aa.¢a an.on as.m in.a " .n.aa. cmsaoasan _ “ mafia ..s._ momma n ) on on.mn nu.tm on. aq.aH no. ne.na a os.e sameness “an em.nm om.mm us.m as.» an.» no.m r on.» sesame mama mm.HH afi.bm cm.o an.ma mm.m an.ma ~ ow.¢a sepnndmam “ swam a swam l . _ I was ek.ae tn.oa no.a _ an.au as.a ~ nq.s ~ an.e schemata a some: one em.nm a¢.ma so.» mo.mn an.» nm.m as.b emdmmm s ammoopn 0mm ms.¢ 0m.on mo.m mo.ma as.m mo.wa _ an.ma mesano Hmo> mam me.a mm.nm an.e oo.mm mo.m. as.a ea.aa I. easemeaam mosamo a maepmo hopes? ammo 9mm same mom peso hem paeo smm ammo new same sex pcmo ems ammo mom OOH op mummpo some; .um.mms mnmth manages coca messes: mmaao was ”made xOOpmosaa so made no .mooo modes so madman no mess» emanam mmaommn mo umpesz mseeemm uncaposd Hmoofigfi- memammNL mefixosm I daassepamoaoo; anchsemm v_ .owma .mmmmm m was mmaommn an fimfimflmmnao .m mend ma memssmm an mpmaudo mo madam meoflsmh uweoeup caom Mucumm>wq mo mmdpdmoee .HH n manna _ 2 .s i t . v ea... .4....«..-. ,nrfii. ... x-.. 3.11-1 e E J). ... i (A ”r...\r.lr.vJH .4 re. r. «H .9 s.. 3*. n. r s r O .0014)” ..I... s s '1 \.L 1' AV" ' . _ 0:... .-. . J04. .- c444 n. .... {spU rt! .lk r . ~ a W... .90.. )-o). “.3031. himu.) u... .... .l. Car. 10 _(w . u Cr «H ..r.. , .r. .2 ...)... y.” e) a ')2. .. \-..ao .Ifl .- ... mfin: OOH 0,... ... fl. ... an . n. .. 4.-.. .... D .H .. ._ N. ..I. \.4\..‘_.. I4 ...) 4‘ ea.) . .U. C _. .x r \.. . Fll * 14 4 l |,\ I).\:. :41JW 1...-- Hr -.. (CH ” ..T . - )1": O i A‘ldl. .- . [Whit .\.,.v .. L”. W... mmC . r . C. . m. r... I. . ‘ l. l I... .‘l \.. J! .\. ..J \I- . W..4 {... JJ MI‘ mom BEG. . o ...A. m 39.! .....H .T- -o a. .H. . . :50 . ... . - . . . I. . l _ _ m “a. .... m. --.: . w _ . F S .4 ‘l. — 1.: O 3.) .11 O )A \i .11 . ~..».. 0 .\\-.\J ... .dl .\I.ul \. .l a ). . l_ ....»‘4 .a oo.ua ma.m ma.- . a. a. be . a s a c. .. .;_. -5 ; ;a.:r .. I )i . ; . \J j \J ..I; .4.. in} .1 1....” )..i \. ea sa..4 e..a a..pa at.» . on am no ....;; . p..:cnn . . s s \...O .4.. ...)0. \.. .).wl111 \.«H e....1 3.1.0144.- nu‘....1«)) n.4,...) 0.. out .o .. we. .. .. A r -.. ..- o... .L, . . .. .. i. A 72.. u. 4.. ... x )ast ..I... )0.) . sioHo. as 04.0 .J O) 33...). U.)«_. «1.46.4 are ,6 .. a. a -. m. . co .2. :4. ,_.. e ._ ...; ..H .H .. ,5. -. 1 ill} 1‘: \.JV \. 1‘1) m .. .a)... _ .\u .L 1y . is .l ....a (K i i II." "I' I 4 1 I l I) \I I l I 11u\: in . \ I .1 J- 3 1‘1) \.. NJpDF PhD.) 'H.. r o p. ulna PM) #- MA..N. HI pl q» t t . o” a ... ) 9H. L H “diw U s...” . .+#...Hs.. n J 4 .... ) . . a. . . . - . - . \. . \ A .. ..0 fl t ..u . . u «s .. 14‘ ”d ‘ \I J! .. )4411 law «.....p _ ...drl Mia-HG 3.1,... miaxrfixwmln e m.“ -womUmWMu mt“; ..irwwfil _ m.+.:\~.«w.4,r m0 “1...; find“ J. murmnl.— m41.(c.~..h. chafiuqo jag v \s I . l J x. 1 4 \1 .J‘ (... O a. _ 0:4. 1. 1 4 l 5.. s 1 1|. \ I ¢ ..x/ .e.r. LFJ Qur .rdl .\. (v .\.lef. .-n . aflg own}. a v: .. WI. 0: 4? (AU. adjok «.Lv OHIMI‘adw: MULJohol...-Wrn c. .1 .. .1 I... .~.. )...... W< \.. a .1. .... .. .1 4l\11< \/ I4: «1 ._ 4.).4. .HGDEZF wk“... ”...... mail.» c .... 4.)). . EMISSL . GIL.“ an ...c Q.-. .....JC 3:” ... L 1 P u - r Id .thJ All “\.4 \...‘Av ‘1 «\J Cw\ (17w L. 4C ..H( n (r2 \.. n4. \1 \. \410 he 4 d .4 ,l N} \J t, D Q .. . \. {Ad 4 . a. .4 I J. t a) J ) I \u 1. In A” “r.\ alarb pi. i (A... “7“ ix. TRY ”r...” ,U .»H C f... “1» 1...-L. . Q ... MW. Radar-L an“! O Hvdfi I.» A _r m P _ + ”—..U 3 . ‘1.“ .. 1. \.A . .z.4. ea} a . 4‘ J .G \J (.3 . 1 .x t C4 1‘. . s 4 ..Ho .U.../Pnrr_L ..UHHr .rrH U.v H H... -.r .+ d .rOC ..JCOpmu/Hufiflfl (+5; .. v ..D 30qule o HHH m mlrud 3f; ’1 '3 I I f a _ _. .ummfiagruuwwmw: ans Lama "momfiom _ .mHDmHil Hmpoe Hes mm.am ma.a mm.e mo.m aw. mw.o mandate Hmm mm..m nm.m m:.: m:.w- mm.m om.ma W Hw.ma ., imam. mmmm Ho.a pm.HH mm.aa mm.ja em.m 0w.w ma.ma . ...r.www 03....th um . wwwma IHWwoB .. mam :m.mm m~.HH am. ma.aa ma.m mm.oa We.m maaemwnr amsm Hm.ma mm.an mm.e m@.m an Oe.n .o.e -..”...m. mmuma am.m mw.aa mm.» em.aa mm. om om.u m~.mm m...»we.e. “NH”... a w-... 3me J :a.om mm.m wm.a Na.aw mm.m mm.m mm.ma mus weep d >eam mo. mm oa.ma m.e em.mm e:.a mm.w ow.aa .....m a.c.:ooe mo. N mMOON ome. jHeON inflow NMemH KWOmH ......LHWNWMHJW. WHem. mmefifl _ ONem. RNANN oweNH mmew mNemN .Hfl4rrb GIN _ me>aeo w map» some 32 ammo pom peso sombpemo pom ammo new memo new ammo mam name hem .IJ peso new OOH msmnpo 1M1.w4.mmm msmmdm mucusea Heoca wumMnea mamas 9p Hedda MOme ho mqnwp mac.u .Qooo Medea mummflu ho mdpmm 0Hafids . mam wrfiomaw Imsfifl Mo panama mammamm #0 .eowposm m coca so memaamm _ quMomm compaspemoooo . Assamese .czmH .mowmoao can wmaoomm an ceamfimmmao afloaz ea memmsmm mama he wpoapdo mo momma meownmb mmdosmp cHOm excepmobfin mo ommpmmonem . >H.mn manna 107 .mwmflmsnoflpmnsw HfimE mama “mondom omeH Ibmm Hmpow wmmm. ow.oa ma.m mm.oH ume mm.» moJmmmu mm mm amp meow mm.m mo.na mw.wH uw.va mm.m mm.aa mm.¢m no mm: o bmm om.n No.0H mH.m Om.wm Hm.¢ mm.ma mm.mm pom man 0 mpama d mama ,NmmOH. mom wwaDBIII Haam mm.d «m.aa quna Nn.¢ mm.wm mm.ma mm.mm wm mm amp Hm¢b mw.a mm.ma no.b mm.ma mm.mm mo.¢H mm.mm oon mm: 0 0mm nm.¢a Hm.wa ¢¢.m ma.am mm.w ma.ma m§.wa mam m I o mwam a mmo lllrll .Dan mm” HmPOBx mum ou.m ow.m an. Hm.ma ma.w mn.o ma.oo mm ma nmbo mmfia Hm.n No.5H mm.n ow.am wm.ba mm.m wo.mm mma mat m mom mm.¢ ow.ma mw.n Hm.am ow.oa Hw.oa ma.ma mmb v I[m mmbawo @ mappm nmpfidz pcmo pmm pcmo 9mm pumo pom pmmo nmm pnmo ham puma pmm pnmo nmm umpadz puma Hmn 00H mnmppo magma .mc.mmm mummSD mammnmfi Hmooa mpmMnt manna 0p stum xoOPm no mama Ho .9000 Modup mummam no mama» OHHQSQ mo mmmao can Im>HH mo ymgadz mnanmm maoflpoqm Hwooq no mnnawmo wqflzowm qoflpmaucmonoo quflfinme Ramada mmfiommm .owma .mafiovmm nowm pom Euwm 9mm uaom nomads mp nmfimfimmmao .H awn: afl pmapsa mo mmhe nowo qmdopap uaom MoOpmmbfiq Ampamswam Mo mommpdmopmm . > m mapme T- I k), \l \Julll i ll\):!lu -1? l -ff If ll'lllflllfllfl'lTul‘lif‘ {at Ilr‘nllllllla 108 .mopawqqupmmda aamB mama “mondom n—r‘ «mma me Hmpoe mmw mo.a mw.mm ab.m «a.wo m mm nope bow na. mm.wa ma.aa mm.m¢ 6m.mm mm mmuom mom no.0 no.3a o¢.m wm.aw o¢.m mn.ma om» mano moawa @ avoum $3 -, r 53 qrEoH mmman mar“ no; mwpowwa ouch w 1: 0 on Hobo mmna mm.m o¢.mm om.o mw.wa mm.m mw.ma " a¢.ma mm mmuoa mam m.ma wu.mm om.a mm.wm om.m 00.0 W am.ma awn o no M mwag a mmom mmm vfli maw annoy aaa om.m mm.oa 90.nm oo.¢m n ma Hobo amm om.¢ mm.mm mm.n mw.¢n nm.n mm.m La.ma #0 main wmn wm.aa mm.am um.a mm.mw Na.a am.w mm.m man o no . mm>amo a mappwo .III il!lu nil: . nomad? puma pom ammo pom pumo mom pqoo mom flung pom pnmo pom puma pom meofidm . puma pom ooa mnmnpo magma .mQ.mmm mammsn mpmxpnfi amooa muompufi . mspmm mmmao op amscm MOOPm no oawm no .Qooo Modnp mpunam ho mwpmm oaaoda _ mo was mvaommm Impaa mo nopEdZ mHmFme mnoHpo54 amooa no mpmaomn msauomm sofipnuemoonoo amoHEpmH “Hopadz .ovma .mmaoomm zoom mom Show you oaom gonads mp omawammmao .m mega ca pmapso go mama 30mm synopcp oaom Moopmmbaa pops;5mam mo momwpcmopom .H> m manme __...[., > > tr ‘ e L, a; E. k t .mvhamuQOapansu 4aoa mama "meadow a mOa - Ofla flmPOB mmwae wasp pom dfipaoamp mac; 0 om mm.mw nn.na a ma mm.wm . «$.00 ww.wm mm . mmm ova ooa 00.0w mm ma.on mn.an mm.¢ mo mm.mm m©.ma wo.ma $0.3 Happy an gm>o mmloa ®<3awo fl mappwo III-III Ill , 1|" Hm3§5k paws HEM pfloa Hwa Pawn Hm: Pqnv Ram ammo HJH pwvw RDA Jnmo Mom Hvflifif IX pcmo pom ooa m mono mmomn .mu.mmm whomuc mp; no: +rooa mpwwa.a maanw mwmao O ‘ Ow awzrm xoOpm HO mawm no .@000 xozap mwuuafi ho muhar oaandfi :0 van m)aon@m Impaa %o Hmpfidu mmepmb chauodd amooa Ho mhmawnfl muaxvmm soapsppumouoo amqwihmfl HDQHDH v .owma .mmaoumm goo; hop prk hog oaom huzssu mm d amaummam .n want ma '\ - |\’r ‘I. |.I\ r ‘ lily ‘ 1 J I.. I Ivy |> . ..Dv ‘. ’ It F. ‘ III“ II. pmapso mo nmmp some m,oommw maom moojmv>aa mam 233a) mo ms:mwcoonma .HHb m capo? \ .mmnaccQOanwosc aaos mama "mondom mmmma mama ammmm. mmma no. :w.m mmnm mw.m ma.m am.m mm.mm1 \mm mm um mmm: om.a aa.ma am.ma aa.m mm.a mm.oa am.mm ama m: :00a mm.m mm.ma mm.m mm.mm mo.m m:.wa om.mm mama ma- u....-..ua and Qmm wwmwa mama amaoa ammm wa.a mo.aa mw.ma mo.a m.mm m.om mm.am mm mm mm mmmm ma.m aa.:a mm.n mm.ma m:.am mn.aa mm.mm mwm mu- mama mw.ma :w.ma mm.m ::.mm am.oa mo.:a mm.ma woaa m H mgwf dram wv mum: r ‘mama awpon .gh aaaa om.m mm.: an.“ a om.om om.ma mm.m mm.ma mm ma “m5 mozm mw.a ao.ma wm.: aw.wm mm.na aa.m ma.mu mmm ma. maoa am.m ma.ma Om.m aw.am mm.m mw.ma mm.ma mmma ax“ mmbawo 6.9m map» nmpapz . pnmonmmw pqoo nmm ammo nmm pamo nwm ammo nmm pnoo mum. pooo nom nmpfiflm ammo nomaXHa mqnwp .m:.mmw mnoth mpomnda amoQa mpoxHfia manmm mmwaoIL op amdoo xooum mnmgpo mamm no .mooo Moan» mucoaa no mono» oaapsm Mo ago moaommm Imbaa mo nmpasz no mnoanwh mnoapod< aooon no mnoamon mnaxomm noapmnpoooqoo awaaanme nmpapz "\ .ozma .ananan .mmaommm noam now anmm non oaom nopadn an cmamHmmmao .poapso no make gomm gmdonnp oaom accummbaa nmpmmdmam mo mmMpamonom .HHH> m mapma .a r ‘r—v “-41, em‘! —~“A‘-.l/' " 3W4 '4 7- . n.‘ M L ‘ .A- ,9 v." V a § . - »‘«. 1'4 -r )z‘AV'P". "in an . 'f‘h - ’-A\'m.". 3., 4.; ‘. n ..I J67 Johnson 142666 ' ..--.I. INIIIWHHIIIHIIHHIIUWIIIIVHIIIIIWITITIWIW ES 137538 ‘\ \‘\ \. x .\ if .1“ _g 1' ~ . 1., a‘ .. ‘ q‘ . o “g N :1 V . ‘ ,3 1“ ‘4‘- , ..._ 24, a ‘ ‘ ' J67 Johnson 142686 " 'uf'r' WWWWW"WW1WWW“W 04137538