Skip to main content

Full text of "The Market administrator's bulletin"

See other formats


Historic, Archive Document 

Do not assume content reflects current 
scientific knowledge, policies, or practices. 



pESEiVs 

THE r^3^- 

7fC&i6et rfctmfai4tnatwt& 

BULLETIN 

MARKET ADMINISTRATOR 




Published at 79 East State Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215 

ISSUED FOR PRODUCERS WHO ARE NOT MEMBERS OF COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATIONS 



MARCH, 1968 

MILK PRICES UP IN EARLY 1968 

The Dairy Situation, Economic Research Service USDA, March, 1968 



Average prices farmers received 
for milk exceeded year-earlier levels 
in January and February, after run- 
ning slightly below from August to 
November of 1967. Higher prices 
were due primarily to premiums pro- 
ducer organizations negotiated above 
the Class I minimum price levels. 
Prices dealers paid for milk in bot- 
tling for October-January averaged 
$6.32 per 100 pounds, up 2 percent 
from a year earlier, and in early 
February were $6.33, up 3 percent. 

Higher prices for Class I milk 
brought the February price farmers 
received for milk eligible for the 
fluid market to an average $5.66 per 
100 pounds, up 17 cents from a year 
earlier. On the other hand, the manu- 
facturing grade milk price was $4.11, 
about the same as a year > rrlier. The 
weighted average of these prices — 
the price received for all milk — was 
$5.21 per 100 pounds, up 15 cents 
from a year earlier. 

The present support level — $4.00 
per 100 pounds for manufacturing 
grade milk of average test — was at 
84 percent of parity in February, 
compared with 89.5 percent when the 
$4.00 support was established. 

Before April 1 of this year, USDA 
must announce the support level for 
the 1968-69 marketing year. The 
prices of butterfat (in farm-separa- 



ted cream) is supported at 68 cents 
per pound, 79 percent of parity in 
February. 

Assuming no change in the price 
support level and continuation of 
present Federal order Class I prices, 
the average price farmers receive 
in the second quarter likely will be 
close to the year-earlier level. The 
major reason for the expected small 
price change from a year earlier dur- 
ing the second quarter is the persis- 
tant excess supply of dairy products. 
This excess is expected to hold man- 
ufacturing grade milk prices close 
to the support level through June. 
Although imports and production 
were lower, commercial disappear- 
ance also has been low and CCC pur- 
chases in January and February 
were substantial. Hence, manufac- 
turing grade milk prices have re- 
mained in about the same relation- 
ship to the support level as they 
were in most of 1967 — about 7-8 cents 
higher. Seasonally increasing sup- 
plies of milk in fluid markets and 
therefore decreasing proportions of 
milk deliveries used in bottling are 
expected to lower blend prices in 
fluid milk markets in the second 
quarter of 1968. Together with sea- 
sonally lower milkfat content of 
milk, this will cause average prices 
farmers receive for all milk to be 
(Continued on Back Page) 



Vol. 24 No. 3 

Feed Concentrate 
Supplies Up 5 Percent 

The Feed Situation. Economic Research Service, 

USDA, February, 1968 

The total supply to feed grains and 
other concentrates for 1967-68 is es- 
timated at 248 million tons, 5 per- 
cent larger than a year earlier and 
about the same as the 1961-65 aver- 
age. The total tonnage fed in Octo- 
ber-December was nearly equal to 
the very heavy feeding in that 
quarter a year earlier. The more fav- 
orable livestock-feed price ratios and 
high moisture corn are expected to 
result in continued heavy feeding 
per animal unit during the current 
feeding year — probably 4 or 5 per- 
cent higher than in 1966-67. The 
number of grain-consuming animal 
units to be fed in 1967-68 is now ex- 
pected to be about the same as the 
180 million in 1966-67 — about 5 per- 
cent above the 1961-65 average. Total 
consumption of all concentrates for 
1967-68 is now expected to be about 6 
million tons above the 161 million 
tons fed in the 2 preceding years. 

Because of the bumper corn crop 
and the relatively smaller supplies of 
other feed grains, heavier corn feed- 
ing is expected to account for all of 
the increase in the total tonnage of 
concentrates fed this year as com- 
pared with last. The decline in prices 
since last summer has resulted in 
relatively low corn prices this fall and 

(Continued on Back Page) 



COLUMBUS, OHIO Milk Marketing Area 

Room 505, Hartman Bldg., 79 East State St., Columbus, Ohio 



Federal Order No. 35 
Telephone CApital 4-5197 






QoiumluU. 



MARKET FACTS FOR EASY REFERENCE 



PRICE SUMMARY 

Producers' Uniform Price (3.5%) 

Class I (3.5%) 

Class II (3.5%) 

Producer But+erfat Different ia! for each one-tenth percent 



UTILIZATION SUMMARY 

Percent of Producer Milk in Class I . . . , 
Percent of Producer Butterfat in Class I 
Percent of Producer Milk in Class II . . . , 
Percent of Producer Butterfat in Class II 



PRODUCER MILK RECEIPTS 

Total Pounds Producer Milk Delivered . 
Average Daily Class I Producer Milk . 

Total Number of Producers 

Average Daily Receipts per Producer . 

Average Butterfat Test 

Total Value of Producer Milk at Test . 
Income per Producer (7 Day Average) 



GROSS CLASS USE (Pounds) 

Class I Skim 

Class I Butterfat 

Class I Milk 

Class II Skim 

Class II Butterfat 

Class II Milk 



AVERAGE DAILY SALES (Quarts) 

Milk 

Buttermilk 

Chocolate 

Skim 

Cream 



Feb. 


Jan. 


February 


1968 


1968 


1967 


$5.34 


$5.38 


$5.44 


5.78 


5.78 


5.89 


3.91 


3.91 


3.91 


9.2£ 


9.2? 


9.4£ 








80.7 


82.7 


81.4 


70.2 


71.5 


72.9 


19.3 


17.3 


18.6 


29.8 


28.5 


27.1 


44,796,381 


47,083,651 


42,469,579 


1,254,338 


1,270,563 


1,250,580 


1,646 


1,652 


1,549 


938 


919 


979 


3.92 


3.96 


387 


$2,562,552 


$2,729,441 


$2,463,206 


$375 


$373 


$397 


34,909,259 


37,618,282 


33,369,820 


1,232,028 


1,335,726 


1, ,198, 995 


36,141,287 


38,954,008 


34,568,815 


8,131,429 


7,598,502 


7,454,229 


523,665 


531,141 


446,535 


8,655,094 


8,129,643 


7,900,764 


416,616 


422,31 1 


433,21 1 


5,038 


5,002 


5,635 


33,390 


30,676 


31,587 


12,499 


1 1,768 


6,938 


6,584 


6,253 


12,612 









COLUMBUS, OHIO Milk Marketing Area 

Room 505, Hartman Bldg., 79 East State St., Columbus, Ohio 



Federal Order No. 35 
Telephone CApital 4-519? 



COMPARATIVE STATISTICS * COLUMBUS MARKETING AREA * FEB., 1959 - '68 



Year 


Receipts 

From 

Producers 


Average 

Butter- 

fat 

Test 


Pe 


rcentaqe of Producer 
Milk in Each Class 


U niform 
Producer 
Price 
(3.5%) 


Class Prices at 3.5% 


Number 

of 

Producers 


Daily 

Average 

Production 


Class 

1 


Class 

II 


Class 

III 


Class 

IV 


Class 

1 


Class 

II 


Class 

III 


Class 

IV 


1959 


21,909,063 


3.85 


86.4 


10.7 


3.1 


3.4 


4.34 


4.44 


4.04 


3.94 


2.869 


1,689 


463 


I960 


27,057,916 


3.93 


80.9 


7.2 


2.2 


9.7 


4.28 


4.508 


4.108 


3.742 


2.993 


1,703 


548 


1961 


27,302,402 


3.87 


78.4 


7.9 


1.5 


! 2.2 


4.44 


4.715 


4.315 


3.842 


3.095 


1,482 


658 


1962 


30,576,654 


3.93 


77.5 


6.8 


2.0 


13.7 


4.28 


4.516 


4.1 16 


3.887 


3.261 


1,326 


824 


1963 


34,477, 158 


3.94 


79.0 


6.8 


2.7 


1 1.5 


4.03 


4.21 


3.801 


3.652 


3.052 


1,385 


889 


1964 


38.937,438 


3.86 


74.8 


8.5 


1.9 


14.8 


4.1 1 


4.38 


3.941 


3.71 1 


3.077 


1,352 


993 


1965 


42,549,333 


3.87 


79.8 


20.2 






4.42 


4.78 


3.130 






1,670 


910 


1966 


41,815,504 


3.87 


83.0 


17.0 






4.76 


5.10 


3.320 






1,593 


938 


1967 


42,469,579 


3.87 


81.4 


18.6 






5.44 


5.89 


3.91 






1,549 


979 


1968 


44,796,381 


3.92 


80.7 


19.3 






5.34 


5.78 


3.91 






1,646 


938 



Formulated Food Improves Nutrition In Developing Countries 

The Feed Situation. Economic Research Service. USDA, February, 1968 



There can be a big difference be- 
tween filling empty stomachs and 
providing adequate nutrition. And 
concern for this difference, explain 
U.S. Department of Agriculture 
scientists, is behind the shipment of 
nearly 400 million pounds of a multi- 
purpose food blend from the United 
States to more than 90 developing 
countries. 

The formulated food is called CSM, 
representing the three main ingre- 
dients — corn, soybeans, and milk. 

CSM was developed to meet an ur- 
gent need for a food that is inexpen- 
sive, is rich in proteins, stores well, 
and may be easily prepared in a var- 
iety of ways. It can supplement the 
diet of any poorly nourished person, 
but especially weaned infants and 
pre-school children. 

Scientists in USDA’s Agricultural 
Research Service, cooperating with 
the Agency for International Devel- 
opment and the National Institutes 
of Health, developed the CSM formu- 
la. A blended food high in the pro- 
teins so desperately needed in the de- 
veloping countries, CSM is manufac- 
tured by commercial millers and is 
purchased by USDA for distribution 
abroad by AID and voluntary groups. 

It consists of processed cornmeal 
(68 percent), soybean flour (25 per- 
cent), nonfat dry milk (5 percent), 



and minerals and vitamins (2 per- 
cent). The cost is approximately 7.5 
cets per pound packaged and deliver- 
ed to ocean ports. 

Three and one-half ounces of this 
blend, when made into a gruel or 
porridge, will supply a child with one- 
third to one-half or more of the neces- 
sary daily nutrients, except for as- 
corbic acid. These nutrients are par- 
ticularly important during a period 
in his life when lack of proper food 
can irreversibly harm both body and 
mind. (Officials estimate that the 
death rate for children under 5 
years of age is about 40 times higher 
for children in undernourished fami- 
lies than for children who are well 
fed. Those undernourished children 
who survive face an average life 
span of 30 years with a lowered ca- 
pacity to learn and without the en- 
ergy to help themselves.) When 
children are reached in time they re- 
spond rapidly to the improved diet. 

USDA has not stopped with devel- 
opment of the CSM formula. Scien- 
tists from the Department’s Consum- 
er and Marketing Service check each 
shipment to be sure the product 
meets specifications covering protein 
and fat content as well as texture, 
and cooked consistency checks are 
also made to see that the odor and 
flavor are satisfactory. ARS food 
specialists prepare and test samples 



of soups, beverages, gruels, and por- 
ridges for flavor and other character- 
istics which combine to make the 
blend acceptable. Experience shows 
that even hungry people will not eat 
a food if the taste, appearance, tex- 
ture, or odor offends them — and 
each country has its own standards. 
Food habits are hard to change, often 
reflecting centuries-old religious and 
social beliefs and superstitions. 

Besides developing the formula 
for CSM and the specifications for 
the product, ARS scientist have con- 
ducted research on different methods 
for precooking corn-meal, the major 
ingredient. This research as contrib- 
uted to increased production, there- 
by making the product more availa- 
ble to the government. The revised 
specifications assure uniformity re- 
gardless of the production method 
used. 

Efforts to develop new uses for 
CSM are continuing, as are experi- 
ments designed to further perfect the 
formula. Further research is also de- 
voted to composition of the blend (fat 
content, non-fat dry milk, and inclu- 
sion of sucrose or dextrose) as it re- 
lates to moisture content and tem- 
perature. Both are very important 
to “keeping quality” of the product 
during storage and distribution, and 
to flavor and texture when it is con- 
sumed. 



si zt* oiho 'snawmoo 

+90J+S a+e+S + SB 3 6 L 

302 uuooy 

Nii3*iina 

3 HI 



Market Quotation mm Z 

MINNESOTA-WISCONSIN PRICE SERIES $4.00 

Butter-nonfat dry milk price, 3.5% per cwt. (Columbus) 3.91 

Average Price per lb. 92-score butter at Chicago 6644 

Average carlot prices, spray process nonfat dry milk, 

f.o.b. Chicago area manufacturing plants 1946 

Milk Output Declines In Early 1968 

The Daf-ry Situation, Economic Research Service USD A, March, 1968 



MILK PRICES UP . . . 

(Continued from Front Page) 
lower in the second quarter of this 
year than in the first quarter. 

Prices for Class I milk in most Fed- 
eral order markets have been based 
on a minimum basic formula price 
of $4.05 per 100 pounds (when the 
Minnesota-Wisconsin manufacturing 
milk price is lower) plus a temporary 
20-cent increase in the Class I differ- 
ential. Iii those few markets using 
economic formulas, comparable ac- 
tions were taken. These temporary 
increases apply through April of 
this year. The level of Class I prices 
after April, therefore, will be affec- 
ted by Federal milk marketing order 
actions. A hearing was held on Feb- 
ruary 23 to consider proposals for 
the extension of these temporary 
pricing provisions. Testimony given 
at this hearing will be used by the 
Department in arriving at a decision. 



FEED CONCETRATE SUPPLIES 
(Continued from Front Page) 
winter in relation to wheat. This re- 
duced wheat feeding this winter; 
however, wheat feeding for the en- 
tire feeding year may remain some- 
where near the high level of the past 
3 feeding years, when around 100 to 
120 million bushels have been fed an- 
uallv. Some increase is in prospect 
in the quantity of soybean meal fed, 
but this will be largely offset by 
some further reduction in the ton- 
nage of cottonseed meal available for 
livestock feeding. 



Milk Production was 9.6 billion 
pounds in January, 2.4 percent below 
a year earlier, and 5.8 percent under 
the 5-year January average. After 
running slightly above a year earlier 
in January and February 1967, milk 
production ran below year-earlier 
levels during the rest of the* year, 
with a 1.4 percent decline in the 
fourth quarter. 

January production was down in all 
regions except in the Sountheast and 
Sourthen Plains States, dropping as 
much as 4 percent in the Northeast 
and 5 percent in the Corn Belt. 

Slowing gains in output per cow 
from above-average rates of a year 
earlier did not offset the decline in 
cow numbers. Output per cow was 
724 pounds in January — up only 1 
percent from a year earlier, compared 
with the 5.8 percent rise in January 
1967. Gains from a year earlier start- 
ed to slow in the fall of 1967, and 
averaged only about 2.2 percent in 
the fourth quarter. 

Reports of poor quality forage in 
much of the Northeast and Midwest 
dairy areas suggest that this has 



been largely responsible for below- 
average gains in output per cow. Al- 
though the hay crop in these ; areas 
was larger than a year earlier, wet 
weather during the harvest season 
reduced the feeding quality of hay 
and resulted in high-moisture silage. 

Although dairy farmers were 
feeding milk cows more grain and 
concentrates, the increase was below 
average and apparently was not off- 
setting the lower-quality roughage. 
Grain and other concentrates fed 
milk cows in reporters’ herds avera- 
ged 10.9 pounds on February 1. 
Although this was up 2.8 percent 
from a year earlier, it fell short of 
the 4 percent rise from a year earlier 
during 1967 and gains averaging 
about 6 percent annually since 1960. 

Poor roughage quality may contin- 
ue to limit gains in output per cow, 
at least through the winter feeding 
season. Consequently, milk produc- 
tion likely will continue under year- 
earlier levels through the first half 
of 1968, and for the entire year is 
expected to total lower than in 1967.