Microsoft Wants To Close Broadband Gap In Rural America

By Todd Neeley
DTN Staff Reporter

Omaha (DTN) – Microsoft has announced a potential way to provide broadband access to more than 23 million rural Americans using what is called “TV white space.”
In an announcement on July 11, the company’s president, Brad Smith, told an audience of the Media Institute in Washington, D.C., that Microsoft plans to invest its own money in a philanthropic effort to provide broadband access through what essentially is unused television space.
That includes providing broadband to about 2 million people in rural areas in the next year.
About 34 million people lack access to broadband, including about 23.4 million in rural America. Microsoft said its goal is to close that gap in the next five years.
Though talk of broadband expansion centers on 5G networks, Smith told the audience that 5G does nothing to provide broadband to rural America.
“The exciting part of TV white space is it can travel long distances,” Smith said. When it comes to 5G, however, he said it is only good for broadband expansion in densely populated areas.
Microsoft is among a group of technology companies that have been pushing the idea for the past decade. Microsoft joined Google, Dell, HP, Intel, Philips, Earthlink and Samsung, among others, to form the White Spaces Coalition.
HOW THE TECHNOLOGY WORKS
In a Microsoft white paper released, the company described how the use on TV white space would work.
TV white space essentially is unused airwaves left by the termination of analog television as digital was implemented. Microsoft’s idea is to access those white spaces using fixed wireless technology and satellite technology.
There is technology available that would allow rural residents to buy router-type devices to access the TV white space.
According to a white paper from the company, http://bit.ly/2t4AbpM, this approach would lead to the reduction of capital and operating costs by about 80% compared to using just fiber optics. It would save about 50% compared to the cost of current LTE fixed wireless technology.
“One key to deploying this strategy successfully is to use the right technology in the right places,” according to the white paper. “TV white spaces2 is expected to provide the best approach to reach approximately 80% of this underserved rural population, particularly in areas with a population density between two and 200 people per square mile.”
Microsoft already has deployed 20 TV white spaces projects worldwide serving about 185,000 users. There is potential in rural America to provide broadband at a much less costly amount compared to other available technologies.
“But TV white spaces alone will not provide the complete solution,” the white paper said. “Satellite coverage is expected to be the most cost-effective solution for most areas with a population density of less than two people per square mile, and LTE fixed wireless for most areas with a density greater than 200 people per square mile. This mixed model for expanding broadband coverage will likely bring the total national cost of closing the rural broadband gap to roughly $10 billion.”
Microsoft said that to install 4G LTE in rural America would cost between $15 billion and $25 billion. The 4G LTE is the standard high-speed wireless connection. The costs to install fiber optics to rural homes would be $45 billion to $65 billion.
Microsoft plans to partner with companies in 12 states in the next year, including Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, New York, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin.
“Our goal is not to enter the telecommunications business ourselves or even to profit directly from these projects,” the white paper said. “We will invest in the upfront capital projects needed to expand broadband coverage, seek a revenue share from operators to recoup our investment, and then use these revenue proceeds to invest in additional projects to expand coverage further.”
The plan also includes providing training in rural areas through the company’s Rural Airband Initiative, including the National 4-H Council.
In addition, Microsoft plans to stimulate investment in technology licensing “through royalty-free access to at least 39 patents and sample source code related to technology we’ve developed to better enable broadband connectivity through the use of TV white spaces spectrum in rural areas.”
AG LEADERS WELCOME ANNOUNCEMENT
Johnathan Hladik, policy program director for the Center for Rural Affairs based in Lyons, Nebraska, said Microsoft is attempting to do what politicians have failed to accomplish.
“In a lot of ways, it looks like Microsoft has done what the Trump administration has failed to do, which is to develop a clear vision, a clear goal, and a clear timeline,” Hladik told DTN.
“For years, politicians and others have given lip service to the need for expanded broadband in rural areas, but haven’t supported those words with actions. Both adequate funding and innovative policy solutions have been missing. What Microsoft is proposing is not the public-private partnership we have become accustomed to. Their effort here is much more philanthropic in nature.
“Will other tech companies do the same? It is hard to say, but it would be a poor strategy to assume they will,” Hladik said. “Closing the broadband gap certainly demands action from the private sector, but we should not wait around for similar examples of philanthropy.”
R.J. Karney, director of congressional relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation, told DTN that having Microsoft involved is good for farmers and ranchers.
“Looking at the big picture, it’s great to see Microsoft step up and begin an initiative to bring broadband to rural America,” he said. “Access to broadband is essential for farmers and ranchers to utilize precision agricultural equipment, follow commodity markets, communicate with their customers, gain access to new markets around the world and regulatory compliance.”
INDUSTRY, REGULATORY HURDLES
Microsoft faces two immediate challenges, Hladik said. First, some individuals and communities “just don’t feel an urgent need” to access the technology.
“There are many counties that are getting along just fine with limited broadband access, and this may not be their top priority,” he said.
In addition, there are a number of policy barriers that could stand in Microsoft’s way. Currently, the Federal Communications Commission protects TV white space. Second, there is a need for matching funds at the state and federal levels, Hladik said, and there needs to be improved broadband data collection by the FCC.
“But there is a whole panoply of rules and regulations at the state level that must be accounted for,” he said. “Each state is different, and some regulatory commissions may have laws on the books that limit technologies, carriers, or both. They will have to be realistic about what can and cannot be achieved and need to build strong relationships with key stakeholders now in place.”
Microsoft also faces powerful opposition to the use of TV white space from the likes of the National Association of Broadcasters, which on July 11 issued a scathing statement in opposition.
“It’s the height of arrogance for Microsoft – a $540 billion company – to demand free, unlicensed spectrum after refusing to bid on broadcast TV airwaves in the recent FCC incentive auction,” said NAB Executive Vice President of Communications Dennis Wharton.
“Microsoft’s white space device development has been a well-documented, unmitigated failure. Policymakers should not be misled by slick Microsoft promises that threaten millions of viewers with loss of lifeline broadcast TV programming.”
Microsoft acknowledges its efforts will succeed only with the help of the public sector. That includes having the FCC ensure at least three channels below 700 MHz, where white spaces are available, remain in place on an unlicensed basis.
“In addition, federal and state infrastructure investments should include targeted funds on a matching basis for the capital investments that will best expand coverage into rural areas that currently lack broadband access,” the white paper said.
“Finally, there is a need for im-proved data collection on rural broadband coverage. The FCC can help by accelerating its work to collect and report publicly on the state of broadband coverage in rural counties, thereby aiding policy makers and the private sector in making targeted investments.”
In June, USDA awarded four loans worth about $43.6 million to help provide broadband service in rural California, Illinois, Iowa and Texas, to add nearly 1,000 miles of fiber to fund broadband service.

Lower Price Increases Demand For U.S. Beef In Korea

By Richard Smith
DTN Tokyo Correspondent

Tokyo (DTN) – South Korea’s beef imports totaled 170,176 tons in the first five months of this year, an 8% rise compared to the same period last year.
Consumers in South Korea seek less expensive meat amid the sluggish pace of economic recovery and an anti-graft law, which limits gifts that can be given to public officials, teachers and journalists, the country’s Yonhap News Agency reported.
The anti-graft law, which took effect last September, bans certain people from getting free meals over 30,000 won ($26), gifts worth more than 50,000 won ($43.37), or congratulatory or condolence money exceeding 100,000 won ($86.74).
Gift-giving, meal-treating, congratulatory and condolence money are long-ingrained customs in this part of the world. In recent decades, expensive local beef has been a favored gift in South Korea. Such gifts, however, create opportunities for corruption, which is why South Korea’s legislature has limited the practice.
U.S. beef has been the big winner in the increased South Korean demand for foreign beef, with imports rising 7.5% year-on-year to 63,027 tons from 58,610 tons in January-May. Beef imports from Australia fell a slight 0.2% during the same time period, from 80,891 to 80,713 tons.
An industry source attributed the surge in foreign beef imports to consumers shying away from expensive South Korean beef. “A growing number of consumers are seeking U.S. beef as an alternative to pricey (South) Korean beef, and we expect meat from America will soon regain its No. 1 foreign beef status,” the source said, Yonhap reported.
For their part, South Korea’s imports of Australian beef have been shrinking in recent months after a 2015 drought in Australia reduced the number of cattle there, causing a rise in the Aussie beef prices, Yonhap reported.
Demand for beef in South Korea has been on the rise for well over a decade, Terry Kim, public relations manager for the Meat Export Federation’s South Korea office, told DTN. That demand has been particularly sharper in the Asian market, including South Korea, than in other regions, Kim said.
Underpinned by economic growth and tariff reductions on imported product, per capita beef consumption is forecast to grow from 15.5 kg cwe (carcass weight equivalent) in 2016 to 17.2 kg cwe in 2030, Kim said. “With growing demand, sales and consumption of imported beef in (South) Korea have been continuously on the rise,” Kim said.
U.S. beef has recovered its market-leading position thanks to increased demand and ever-improved consumer confidence in that source of meat. U.S. beef was allowed back into South Korean markets in 2008 following a 2003 ban because of BSE, Kim said.
Korea Customs Service figures Kim provided show U.S. beef took a 64,776-ton (48.4%) share of the total imported beef market last January-May, compared to 49,664 tons (37.3%) for the same period last year, an 11.1% increase.
“With its quality, reasonable price and increasing consumer confidence, U.S. beef is expected to continue to maintain its competitiveness in (South) Korea,” Kim said.

Ag Groups Fear Steel Tariffs Could Spark Trade War

By Chris Clayton
DTN Ag Policy Editor

Washington (DTN) – Farm groups are cautioning the Trump administration not to open a “Pandora’s Box” by claiming restrictions on steel and aluminum are needed to protect “national security.”
Eighteen agricultural groups wrote to Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross, stressing that such a move would be a disaster for global trade, “and for U.S. agriculture in particular.”
The Trump administration is expected to decide any day whether to place tariffs on steel imports, stemming from an April investigation announced by the Commerce Department over whether those imports are harming U.S. national security. It’s a rare argument for a major global power to make in a trade case.
The farm groups wrote to Ross that it would be “a short-sighted mistake” to restrict imports based on national security claims. The farm groups called on Ross to consider the broader implications for the economy “and avoid igniting a trade war through new restrictions on steel or aluminum trade...”
Nick Giordano, vice president and council for global government affairs at the National Pork Producers Council, said farm groups recognize there is an overcapacity of steel and aluminum in the world. Farm groups and other industries are concerned, however, that the Trump administration’s plan would boomerang against other exporting industries. Giordano also pointed out that roughly 25% of pork is exported, and in the case of a crop such as wheat, as much as 50% is exported.
“When you are an export-sensitive industry, there’s a lot of concern it could translate into retaliation,” Giordano said.
The letter to Ross notes that several of the countries that export steel to the U.S. also happen to be large importers of U.S. agricultural products. “The potential for retaliation from these trading partners is very real,” the letter stated. “Short of explicit retaliation, these countries may also stall efforts to resolve current trade issues if they believe they have been unfairly targeted over legitimately traded products.”
The Financial Times reported that the European Union was already working on a list of products to target for possible retaliation, which included “whiskey, orange juice and dairy products.” EU officials made it clear at the G-20 summit they would respond swiftly if President Donald Trump takes action, which would affect as much as $12 billion in European exports to the U.S. (http://on.ft.com/2tSSRbt)
Still, Trump has vowed since last year’s campaign to go after China for dumping steel on the world market. Though China is roughly 10th in the volume of steel exports to the U.S., Trump argues China’s actions directly affect U.S. steel manufacturers.
The U.S. is the largest importer of steel in the world, importing 30.1 million metric tons last year. Still, that was down 25% from two years ago. Canada, Brazil, South Korea, Mexico, Turkey and Japan are the largest steel exporters to the U.S. and collectively account for about 65% of imports. (http://bit.ly/2mWXZpd)
President George W. Bush placed a tariff of up to 30% on steel imports in March 2002, but did not use the national security argument. The European Union threatened to place billions in tariffs on various products. The EU also sued the U.S. In the World Trade Organization and was joined by other countries as well. Canada and Mexico, despite being major steel exporters, were exempted because of the North American Free Trade Agreement. Bush rescinded the tariffs in late 2003.
In their letter July 11, farm groups stated there’s a risk that if the U.S. starts restricting steel and aluminum imports because of “national security concerns,” then it’s likely other countries would follow suit. If the U.S. is going to claim national security as a reason to reduce imports of a given product, then others will do the same, the farm groups wrote. Giordano reiterated that fear.
“It’s not difficult to then say food is a national security item on us, and we’re going to put restrictions on the following products from the following countries,” Giordano said. “So there is a lot of concern from U.S. food and agriculture.”
Trade rules do allow trade restrictions based on national security, but the farm groups noted that argument is rarely used. The farm groups called it a “Pandora’s Box” that, if opened, would devastate global trade. “No country can dictate another’s national security needs, so now every country with a sensitive industry would know that it could follow the example of the United States and find a national security reason to circumvent trade commitments, no matter how flimsy the reason might be.”
Groups signing the letter included: the American Farm Bureau Federation, American Soybean Association, National Association of Wheat Growers, National Barley Growers Association, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, National Corn Growers Association, National Association of Farmer Cooperatives, National Milk Producers Federation, National Pork Producers Council, National Sunflower Association, National Turkey Federation, U.S. Apple Association, U.S. Canola Association, U.S. Dry Bean Council, U.S. Wheat Associates, U.S. Grain Council, USA Dry Pea and Lentil Council, and USA Rice Federation.

Direct Receipts

Direct Receipts: 81,200

Texas 33,000. 79 pct over 600 lbs. 31 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 650 lbs 161.00; 720-725 lbs 147.51; 750-775 lbs 148.02; 825-840 lbs 143.46; 850 lbs 149.00; Aug 675 lbs 154.25; 775 lbs 148.67; Sept 600 lbs 155.00; 650-675 lbs 151.14; 700-725 lbs 152.81; 750-775 lbs 150.34; Oct 750 lbs 150.29; Nov 750 lbs 140.35; Del Current 650 lbs 161.70; 775 lbs 155.00; 800-825 lbs 142.94; 850 lbs 144.00; Aug 650 lbs 156.50; 700 lbs 155.00; 775 lbs 151.80; 800 lbs 149.62; Sept 650 lbs 161.65; 750 lbs 149.00; 800 lbs 150.03; Oct 600 lbs 159.00; 700 lbs 153.25; 750 lbs 150.77; 800 lbs 147.08; Nov 800 lbs 143.00. Medium and Large 1-2 FOB Current 625 lbs 152.55; 680 lbs 155.65; 725-740 lbs 141.41; 750-775 lbs 144.14; 800-825 lbs 139.27; 850-875 lbs 135.84; 900-915 lbs 134.91; Aug 600 lbs 149.50; 725-735 lbs 145.53; 750-775 lbs 141.74; 800 lbs 133.04; 815 lbs 133.15; Sept 750 lbs 145.90; Oct 750 lbs 139.90; Del Current 550 lbs 162.00 Mex; 630 lbs 158.00, 146.50 Mex; 750 lbs 148.50; 800-830 lbs 143.53; Aug 550 lbs 158.00; Sept 900 lbs 142.95; Oct 675 lbs 151.80. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 750 lbs 139.11; Aug 700-725 lbs 141.33; 750 lbs 136.88; Sept 570 lbs 144.00; 675 lbs 144.00; 700-725 lbs 140.26; Oct 700 lbs 143.50; Nov 725 lbs 137.00; Del Current 700-725 lbs 141.09; 800 lbs 138.00; Aug 700-725 lbs 142.84; Sept 625 lbs 153.00; 650 lbs 149.00; 700-725 lbs 141.61; Oct 625 lbs 151.00; 650 lbs 149.15; 700-725 lbs 143.12; Nov 700-725 lbs 140.51. Medium and Large 1-2 FOB Current 585 lbs 156.96; 625 lbs 144.62; 650-700 lbs 140.03; 705-740 lbs 138.83; 750-785 lbs 131.31; Aug 685 lbs 138.12; 725 lbs 133.73; Sept 725 lbs 133.10; Del Current 750 lbs 144.00.
Oklahoma 3800. 98 pct over 600 lbs. 48 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Aug 800 lbs 146.63; Sept 650 lbs 158.15. Medium and Large 1-2 FOB Current 715 lbs 154.00; 800-825 lbs 141.51; 850 lbs 142.00; Aug 650 lbs 153.00; Oct 600 lbs 155.50; 750 lbs 150.40; 800 lbs 141.75. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 700-725 lbs 139.25; 750 lbs 141.00; 800 lbs 134.50; Aug 700 lbs 139.75; Sept 700 lbs 139.75; Oct 700 lbs 138.91; Nov 700 lbs 141.25. Medium and Large 1-2 Del Current 725 lbs 138.25.
New Mexico 6100. 26 pct over 600 lbs. 6 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 Current 800 lbs 142.00. Medium and Large 1-2 Current 550 lbs 157.00 Mex; 630 lbs 157.44; 625 lbs 141.50 Mex; Aug 550 lbs 153.00 Aug. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 Aug 800 lbs 139.68. Heifers: Medium and Large 1-2 Current 630 lbs 140.44, 143.80 Mex.
Kansas 15,300. 100 pct over 600 lbs. No heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 850-890 lbs 139.34; 900 lbs 142.00; July-Aug 840 lbs 143.26; Aug 775 lbs 146.00; 900 lbs 144.50; Del Current 955 lbs 149.00. Medium and Large 12 Del Current 750-775 lbs 147.53; 825 lbs 146.25; 850-875 lbs 137.22; Aug 725 lbs 154.00; 750 lbs 144.00; 800 lbs 137.50; Sept 750 lbs 150.00; Oct 750 lbs 144.00.

National Feeder Cattle Summary

St. Joseph, MO — July 14
National feeder cattle receipts: 150,700

There were not enough comparable sales to call an accurate market trend. Trade was active with moderate supplies and very good to moderate demand, as many markets re-opened this week with their first sale after Independence Day. Demand remains excellent for long-time weaned calves and yearlings coming off of grass. As a typical trend in the summer months, many unweaned calves are beginning to make their way to sale barns; however, these are selling on limited demand. Cattle buyers throughout the Plains continue to demonstrate caution as the hot, humid weather has set in and the ‘dog days of summer’ have arrived, which may have an impact on deteriorating pasture conditions. On July 12 the Bassett Livestock Auction in Nebraska held their Annual BBQ Auction that brought in over 8,000 head on offer and over three loads of 950 pound steers with all the bells and whistles sold at $160. Live and feeder cattle futures started the week by closing slightly lower on July 10; however, all losses were recovered by July 12 with both live and feeder cattle futures closing up the limit. Compared to last July 7, August live cattle futures ended the week $3.03 higher at $117.80 and October $4.75 higher at $118.57. Feeder cattle futures were $9.25 higher at $154.27 for August and $9.05 higher at $154.07 for September. Livestock futures received support from the grain markets, as weaknesses were observed throughout the end of the week. This recent up-trend in livestock futures has those in the fed cattle industry making margin calls again, as the futures come out of a downtrend. Slaughter cattle have continued to move at a good pace, with the year-to-date slaughter 5.9 percent higher than a year ago. This provides support to the feeder cattle market and was demonstrated during this week’s feedlot trade that saw higher prices. In the Southern Plains, live sales traded $2-3 higher at $120. In Nebraska, live sales traded $1-3 higher at $120 and dressed sales were $3 higher at $191. Wheat harvest is wrapping up in the Plains states, with NASS’s Crop Progress Report stating Kansas has 93 percent of winter wheat harvest complete, Oklahoma has 95 percent complete, and Texas has 93 percent complete. This has many anticipating that more cattle will be headed to market in the coming weeks. The northwestern Plains are still experiencing a drought and over time, it has continued to intensify. With grass supplies becoming depleted, many cattle are headed to town earlier than normal, including several cow-calf pairs and cull cows. A few weeks ago, Montana and the Dakota’s were granted permission to use Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) acres for grazing, which was needed as there has been minimal precipitation in the area.
Texas 5600. 74 pct over 600 lbs. 39 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 350-400 lbs (372) 183.71; 400-450 lbs (429) 171.48; 500-550 lbs (509) 160.64; 600-650 lbs (636) 159.98; 650-700 lbs (673) 155.18; 700-750 lbs (716) 157.43; 750-800 lbs (778) 152.36; 800-850 lbs (827) 150.37; 850-900 lbs (882) 141.86; 900-950 lbs (929) 136.00. Medium and Large 1-2 300-350 lbs (322) 180.52; 350-400 lbs (374) 172.34; 400-450 lbs (423) 170.05; 450-500 lbs (464) 163.20; 500-550 lbs (532) 151.15; 550-600 lbs (572) 150.96; 600-650 lbs (618) 144.27; 650-700 lbs (670) 139.53; 700-750 lbs (738) 138.65; 750-800 lbs (774) 137.17; 800-850 lbs (820) 141.83; 850-900 lbs (872) 131.76. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 400-450 lbs (431) 152.72; 450-500 lbs (474) 151.84; 500-550 lbs (526) 141.83; 550-600 lbs (562) 143.76; 600-650 lbs (634) 138.35; 650-700 lbs (667) 138.40; 700-750 lbs (714) 142.68; 750-800 lbs (773) 139.81; 800-850 lbs (817) 128.59; 850-900 lbs (884) 127.76; 900-950 lbs (914) 134.75. Medium and Large 1-2 300-350 lbs (315) 147.07; 400-450 (418) 146.34; 450-500 lbs (473) 147.16; 500-550 lbs (529) 139.06; 550-600 lbs (573) 135.38; 600-650 lbs (633) 135.82; 650-700 lbs (672) 130.80; 700-750 lbs (734) 127.06; 750-800 lbs (780) 131.86; 850-900 (873) 128.00.
Oklahoma 25,800. 74 pct over 600 lbs. 38 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (324) 192.21; 350-400 lbs (391) 179.35; 400-450 lbs (437) 173.15; 450-500 lbs (477) 168.43; 500-550 lbs (533) 164.20; 550-600 lbs (572) 157.99; 600-650 lbs (624) 155.50; 650-700 lbs (666) 155.88; 700-750 lbs (715) 156.06; 750-800 lbs (768) 153.38; 800-850 lbs (822) 149.87; 850-900 lbs (867) 145.11; 900-950 lbs (908) 140.55; 950-1000 lbs (967) 138.83; 1000-1050 lbs (1010) 133.01. Medium and Large 1-2 400-450 lbs (442) 166.39; 450-500 lbs (482) 167.07; 500-550 lbs (520) 162.51; 550-600 lbs (565) 159.05; 600-650 lbs (625) 157.43; 650-700 lbs (679) 154.04; 700-750 lbs (721) 148.77; 750-800 lbs (778) 147.70; 800-850 lbs (828) 144.78; 850-900 lbs (867) 141.90; 900-950 lbs (912) 139.03; 950-1000 lbs (971) 135.62. Holsteins: Large 3 850-900 lbs (885) 72.51. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 350-400 lbs (373) 148.56; 400-450 lbs (422) 152.67; 450-500 lbs (473) 146.88; 500-550 lbs (584) 143.73; 550-600 lbs (584) 143.73; 600-650 lbs (619) 144.88; 650-700 lbs (676) 140.19; 700-750 lbs (719) 140.80; 750-800 lbs (779) 135.74; 800-850 lbs (829) 134.82; 900-950 lbs (915) 126.62. Medium and Large 1-2 300-350 lbs (326) 158.73; 350-400 lbs (324) 154.75; 400-450 lbs (477) 146.84; 450-500 lbs (477) 146.84; 500-550 lbs (522) 144.16; 550-600 lbs (572) 147.98; 600-650 lbs (630) 136.47; 650-700 lbs (681) 138.67; 700-750 lbs (706) 135.87; 750-800 lbs (774) 130.22; 800-850 lbs (835) 131.37; load 880 lbs 124.00.
New Mexico 3200. 37 pct over 600 lbs. 37 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 450-500 lbs (482) 165.50; 500-550 lbs (523) 163.68; 550-600 lbs (582) 154.55; 650-700 lbs (682) 149.90; load 725 lbs 135.00; 750-800 lbs (779) 146.86. Medium and Large 1-2 300-350 lbs (311) 188.85; 400-450 lbs (435) 177.30; 450-500 lbs (476) 167.65; 550-600 lbs (575) 156.60; 700-750 lbs (726) 149.21. Holsteins: Large 3 350-400 lbs (372) 125.52; pkg 635 lbs 112.50. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 400-450 lbs (407) 166.52; 450-500 lbs (474) 154.58; 550-600 lbs (582) 144.50. Medium and Large 1-2 450-500 lbs (513) 147.31; 550-600 lbs (563) 142.64; 650-700 lbs (665) 139.79.
Kansas 3200. 89 pct over 600 lbs. 60 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 550-600 lbs (589) 168.50; 650-700 lbs (679) 160.38; 750-800 lbs (764) 155.59; 850-900 lbs (879) 150.74; 900-950 lbs (924) 141.02; 950-1000 lbs (986) 140.66. Medium and Large 1-2 700-750 lbs (722) 145.42; 750-800 lbs (785) 146.03; 800-850 lbs (835) 142.53; 850-900 lbs (867) 140.20. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 600-650 lbs (630) 148.50; 700-750 lbs (727) 142.73; 750-800 lbs (762) 148.98; 800-850 lbs (824) 138.49; 850-900 lbs (857) 134.50; 900-950 lbs (927) 127.50; 950-1000 lbs (978) 123.95. Medium and Large 1-2 750-800 lbs (787) 142.36; 800-850 lbs (824) 139.89; 850-900 lbs (880) 139.50.
Missouri 22,700. 60 over 600 lbs. 39 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 350-400 lbs (374) 177.51; 400-450 lbs (424) 173.13; 450-500 lbs (480) 166.78; 500-550 lbs (525) 163.19; 550-600 lbs (574) 159.83; 600-650 lbs (624) 157.48; 650-700 lbs (674) 151.32; 700-750 lbs (723) 153.33; 750-800 lbs (780) 142.96; 800-850 lbs (825) 145.65; 850-900 lbs (867) 140.01; 900-950 lbs (926) 136.90; 1000-1050 lbs (1022) 130.54. Medium and Large 1-2 350-400 lbs (365) 164.11; 400-450 lbs (426) 161.74; 450-500 lbs (476) 161.10; 500-550 lbs (525) 155.38; 550-600 lbs (575) 150.49; 600-650 lbs (622) 149.55; 650-700 lbs (679) 146.31; 700-750 lbs (724) 142.99; 750-800 lbs (778) 139.38; 800-850 lbs (820) 135.68; 850-900 lbs (874) 136.02; few loads 970 lbs 135.75. Holsteins: Large 3 750-800 lbs (783) 92.32; 800-850 lbs (819) 83.14; load 1060 lbs 86.85. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 350-400 lbs (372) 159.21; 400-450 lbs (421) 159.51; 450-500 lbs (475) 153.48; 500-550 lbs (524) 149.12; 550-600 lbs (573) 146.55; 600-650 lbs (624) 144.86; 650-700 lbs (680) 143.62; 700-750 lbs (725) 141.41; 750-800 lbs (767) 136.57; 800-850 lbs (820) 133.79. Medium and Large 1-2 350-400 lbs (373) 154.34; 400-450 lbs (427) 144.24; 450-500 lbs (474) 144.20; 500-550 lbs (519) 141.47; 550-600 lbs (573) 139.29; 600-650 lbs (624) 137.05; 650-700 lbs (676) 135.73; 700-750 lbs (719) 133.06; 750-800 lbs (773) 127.75; 800-850 lbs (825) 124.73.
Arkansas 6300. 24 pct over 600 lbs. 41 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (326) 179.04; 350-400 lbs (373) 170.50; 400-450 lbs (422) 166.14; 450-500 lbs (471) 159.57; 500-550 lbs (523) 154.39; 550-600 lbs (574) 148.36; 600-650 lbs (626) 145.46; 650-700 lbs (669) 141.69. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (324) 157.92; 350-400 lbs (374) 152.33; 400-450 lbs (423) 146.24; 450-500 lbs (472) 143.01; 500-550 lbs (522) 139.89; 550-600 lbs (570) 137.32; 600-650 lbs (619) 133.28; 650-700 lbs (667) 129.87.

 

 

 

 

 

logo
Monday, July 24, 2017 1:53 PM