why do we pay these people?

for what we have known forever....

What is Efficient Beef Production? - Derrell S. Peel, Oklahoma State University Extension Livestock Marketing Specialist

Efficiency is important to the profitability of an individual cattle operation and to the competitiveness of the industry as a whole. In times of changing output and input values, it is very important to keep in mind what efficiency is�and what it isn't. It is probably most common to think of efficiency in physical or technical terms, which are based on quantity of output relative to quantity of input. This includes common production values such as feed per pound of gain and pounds of calf weaned per cow. Such physical measurements often provide the rules of thumb that guide day to day decisions in an operation.

However, most producers recognize that there are limits to the extent that physical measures of efficiency are economical. What really matters is economic efficiency, which can be thought of as the value of outputs relative to the value of inputs. This results in the important distinction between maximizing production and optimizing production. This explains, for example, why we see different types of cattle in different parts of the country. In more extensive productions environments, a smaller cow and thus a smaller weaning weight is more economical than the bigger cow size that works better in other regions. Technical efficiency is part of economic efficiency but it is not the whole story. This leads to the most important point in this discussion: changing input and output values can change the economic efficiency even when the technical efficiency has not changed. And that can lead to a situation where the optimal decision changes. Relying on physical production guidelines can lead to less economical results when output and input values change.

One of the most obvious situations could be feedlot production. For many years, the relative cheapness of feed grains meant that production systems that pushed physical efficiency in terms of average daily gain and feed conversion were consistent with economic efficiency. However, when concentrate feeds are fundamentally more expensive, the most economically efficient production may be one that accepts slightly lower physical efficiency by utilizing more alternative feeds. This is not necessarily the case for any or all feedlots at the current time but the point is that the production system must be reevaluated when input costs change.

The same may be true for many decisions made by cattle producers at all levels of the industry. The most economically efficient production systems today may imply different targets for production parameters such as weaning weights, average daily gain, etc. The beef industry has a wide range of flexibility to adjust production systems using different inputs, such as relative amounts of grain versus forage. In today's changing and volatile input markets, it is critical that, as individual producers and as an industry, we examine the economic efficiency of our production systems and be prepared to modify some of the physical rules of thumb that have guided decisions in the past.

so corn went up and beef went up and now they don't have the first feckin clue what is going on, priceless!

It is probably most common to think of efficiency in physical or technical terms which are based on quantity of output relitive to the quantity of input.

What really matters is economic efficiency which can be thought of as value of outputs relitive to the value of inputs.

What the hell is the difference??? It just had to be reworded by some educated idiot so he might justify his salary. People that write shit like this ought to be shot on sight.

Jack, starting the day mad.

MKeeney,

Maybe it has not been known forever. Maybe there is a new crop of cattlemen that have never heard it or have been/are being misled and Peel is just setting the record straight.

Most people know how to farm better than they do

df wrote:

MKeeney,

Maybe it has not been known forever. Maybe there is a new crop of cattlemen that have never heard it or have been/are being misled and Peel is just setting the record straight.

Most people know how to farm better than they do

if people can`t figure these principles out on their own; they don`t need to be working for themselves...Peel obviously agrees...

finally one with a little standup...

Farm Child Labor Laws; Nanny Government Protecting Us from Ourselves - Dillon Feuz, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Applied Economics, Utah State University

I have debated with myself for some time about writing this article. It may prove to be somewhat controversial. However, I finally decided that I would write it and that perhaps those of you who strongly agree with me may be moved to action and those of you who strongly disagree with me may also be moved to action. So, if this column moves you to action, then it has accomplished its purpose.

The U.S. Department of Labor is proposing to change child labor laws pertaining to agricultural workers. There are deaths and injuries that occur every year on farms and ranches across the U.S. Those individuals wanting to change the laws are doing so with the intent of protecting children from potentially dangerous situations. I cannot disagree with their motivation. I certainly do not want to see children injured or killed in a tragic farm accident. However, I do not believe a group of Washington D.C. bureaucrats know enough about farm and ranch life to write a set of rules that will protect your children from farm accidents without seriously impacting your way of life. I believe each of you know best how to teach and train your children to be safe while they work with you on the farm or ranch.

The proposed rule changes do not apply to children if they work for their parents on a farm/ranch owned by their parents. However, if there is joint ownership with other relatives, if the farm is incorporated, even if the shareholders are family, or if the parents are themselves employees then the new proposed rule would apply. The proposed rule changes apply to "young hired farm workers," defined as: (1) Fourteen- and 15-year-olds who are NOT the children of the farm owner or operator; (2) Twelve- and 13-year-olds who work on the same farm where their parents are employed; and (3) Children under the age of 12 who are employed with the written consent of their parents, on a small farm where no employee is required by the Fair Labor Standards Act to be paid the minimum wage.

The major rule changes are that: (1) No young hired farm workers under the age of 16 can operate any power-driven equipment (there is an exception to this after the youth has taken a 90 hour training course provided by your government run public school); (2) Prohibiting young hired farm workers from doing almost all work with livestock in any confined space (corrals, chicken coop, barn stall, etc.); and (3) Prohibiting young hired farm workers from using electronic communication devices while operating power-driven equipment. I see rules 1 and 2, has having the biggest impact on your farm/ranch lifestyle.

If you are concerned about these proposed rule changes, you can make public comments at www.regulations.gov (Please identify all comments submitted in electronic form by the RIN docket number 1235-AA06). Mail can be addressed to Wage and Hour Division, U.S. Department of Labor, Room S-3502, 200 Constitution Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20210.

Now it is time for me to get on my soapbox and rant for a few minutes. If I offend you, feel free to stop reading and then you will have no complaint. I grew up on a family owned ranch. I was driving haying equipment when I was 8 years young. At either 9 or 10, I know I drove hay equipment for other ranchers that were not family members. I also worked in confined spaces with cattle. I have been stepped on, kicked, head butted, and sh*& upon. I know I was fortunate that none of these incidents resulted in serious injury. But, I don't think that was pure luck. My parents and grandparents taught me to never walk behind even our most gentle horse; I knew that that otherwise tame cow could be quite nasty right after she had calved; and I knew that you wore good shoes (boots) not flip-flops when you went to work. I also learned that as I got older and stayed out later on some nights, that the cows still needed fed at the same time the next morning; I think we call that responsibility. I did not have to be taught about the "birds and the bees" in some government mandated sexual education program because I observed that process on the ranch and learned to respect life as I witnessed calves, colts and other animals being born and saw the tender care provided by their mothers and felt the heartache when one of these animals would not survive.

Circumstances changed for me as I began to raise my own family. I was no longer on the ranch. I struggled to find meaningful jobs for my young children to do that they might learn some of the same lessons I had. I was able to move out of town and have a few acres and have a large garden and sweet corn patch. I marveled when my 6-row (children) planter was working efficiently. However, as they grew older and needed jobs to earn money, learn responsibility, and find the joy in a day's labor well performed, I wished they had opportunities on a farm or ranch. There are few jobs that they can work at, that the well-meaning government has not already forbidden.

As I observe many young teen-age youth with no job, I see a negative result. They are more likely to become bored with life and turn to other friends who are equally bored. That often leads to criminal mischief at best and drugs, sex, and gang related behaviors at worst. So my question to you, Department of Labor bureaucrat, is farm employment more risky than gang membership? Which heals quicker, a broken bone from a farm accident or an STD from a sexual accident?

Perhaps some well-meaning parents, who can't find work for their children, spend outrageous amounts of money on sports, music, or other summer camps to keep their children occupied. This is all well, but some of these youth grow up thinking the world owes them a good time; owes them whatever they want and they never realize they actually have to work to get what they want. Some of these youth grow to young adulthood and can't get a job, or won't take a job because it is too hard. They go occupy a park somewhere and demand that those who have worked need to give to them who have not worked.

I will end my rant now, before I have everyone fired up. There are risks in life. I would rather let youth work, knowing there are some risks involved, than take away those opportunities and face the risk of a generation who doesn't know how to work and doesn't see the need to learn.

Only thing I would question, "why call common sense a rant"? why apologize for being right ?

there might be 5,000 cows in this KY county...and nothing else of significance in the way of agriculture...I needed to call one of them to getting a pup, and noticed the size of the AG extension staff...
Name Email Address Title
Melissa Bond melissa.bond@uky.edu Agent for Fine Arts
Ryan Creech ryan.creech@uky.edu Office Staff Assistant
Holly Hane holly.hane@uky.edu 4-H Program Assistant
Peggy Helton phelton@uky.edu Agent for Family and Consumer Sciences
Phil Meeks phil.meeks@uky.edu Agent for Agriculture and Natural Resources
Jonathan Nelson SNAP-ED Assitant
Bonnie Norton bnorton@uky.edu Office Support Staff
Cheryl Owens cheryl.owens@uky.edu EFNEP Assistant
David Perry dperry@uky.edu Agent for 4-H Youth Development
Kristin Smith kristin.smith22@uky.edu Horticulture Program Assistant

Mike I never read much on this but got the just. My father is 89 years old and still fairly whitty he would say the reason why we pay them is that it is better than sending the monery to Israel. Bob H

I got roped into serving on the extension board for two years. I couldn't tell one thing we accomplished worthwhile in that time. It seemed the main point of focus was to make sure you got all available funds, always. The only other time I have been in the Extension office was to watch a video, so I could be certified to spray the chemicals I had been spraying for years anyhow.


I think they do have a pressure cooker tester, which seems to of importance, I guess. Our county doesn't have a livestock specialist, so we had to borrow one from another county, so we could put bulls in the tested bull sales. You know the ones, where they have to be in the top whatever percent of all traits, and be a minimum of a 5 frame, to participate. I saw recently where the Angus where 100 lbs heavier than the Chars at weaning and 250 more at a year. Of course I think they get a whopping 30 bulls entered anymore. Most of the rules were set up to keep from getting 200 bulls back in the day. I guess it worked for them, so well they are nearly obsolete.


Bootheel, not worrying much this crap anymore.

Publish or perish. Set up a trip or two. Have some sponsored meeting.

I will say what this guy wrote compared to a lot of the BS out there is revolutionary in content. The party line including from the AAA is that as producers our job is to keep everyone else in business.