EU Pushes For Free-Trade Pacts With Countries Snubbed By U.S.

Brussels (Dow Jones) – The European Union is defying protectionist trends and pursuing its most ambitious agenda of free-trade agreements in years.
Senior EU officials outlined free-trade agreements they seek to negotiate with Australia and New Zealand, sidestepping the thorny issue of investment protections to fast-track talks.
“The world needs leaders in trade,” European Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom said. “The EU is at the forefront.”
The subtle yet significant shift to the EU’s approach also includes proposals to replace controversial tribunals for settling cross-border investment disputes with an international court and screening foreign investments in Europe.
Brussels’ trade offensive – a gambit to reassert Europe’s global economic prominence that faces internal and external challenges – marks a turnaround. Just last year, the bloc faced profound threats: Britain’s decision to exit from the EU, President Donald Trump’s election on a protectionist economic platform, and growing support within Europe for nationalist political parties.
Today, the U.S. retrenchment on free trade is aiding EU trade efforts. Mr. Trump abandoned the 12-country Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal on his first day in office and threatened to pull the U.S. out of the North American Free Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico, ultimately deciding to renegotiate the pact.
“We thought we’d do nothing” on trade agreements at the start of European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker’s five-year term in 2014, said his chief of staff, Martin Selmayr. “All this has changed, because of Trunp, because of Brexit.”
Longstanding U.S. allies from Mexico to Japan scrambled for stronger economic links with the EU to offset Mr. Trump’s “America First” policies.
In February, Mexico and the EU agreed to accelerate talks to expand an existing trade accord. In a joint statement, they cited the “worrying rise of protectionism.” Tokyo and Brussels reached a political agreement in July to slash almost all bilateral tariffs.
Australia and New Zealand, stung by the trans-Pacific trade deal’s collapse, asked Brussels for trade deals before the U.K. leaves the EU in 2019. Brussels is now close to implementing tariff-free trade with Singapore and Vietnam, and the EU is trying to clinch an agreement with South America’s largest trading bloc, Mercosur.
“Australia shares the EU’s commitment to open markets,” said Australian Trade, Tourism and Investment Minister Steven Ciobo, advocating a “comprehensive agreement.” A New Zealand Foreign Affairs and Trade Ministry official said the EU can choose between speed and scope of a deal, and Wellington “is prepared to work with whatever is decided.”
The EU’s free-trade ambitions got a boost from a ruling in May from the bloc’s top court. The judges said that the EU can enact trade deals on its own, without approval from the bloc’s thicket of almost 40 national and regional parliaments, if the agreements don’t include clauses on portfolio investments and investment-protection mechanisms. All accords negotiated by the commission would need to be adopted by both the European Parliament and EU government leaders.
Brussels’ new strategy prioritizes transparency and speed, reflecting the EU’s desire to overcome pockets of European resistance to free-trade agreements, avoid years-long negotiations and bypass ratification challenges that delay or kill its deals.
Negotiations with Australia and New Zealand are slated to pose the first test of the EU’s ambition to rapidly conclude new trade agreements by omitting controversial investment pacts. The investment element of the EU’s pending deal with Canada, known as CETA, almost derailed it.
“We need to make sure that we cannot only launch trade negotiations, but that we can also conclude them and have them enter into force,” Ms. Malmstrom said.
In response to criticisms that investment-dispute arbitrations override sovereignty and allow multinational corporations to dictate national policies, the commission is asking EU governments for a mandate to negotiate a multilateral investment court with its trade partners. The proposal would replace an existing system of ad-hoc tribunals included in more than 3,200 trade deals with a permanent body, establish an appeals process and reaffirm countries’ regulatory power.
Businesses are applauding the EU’s trade push.
“Europe has a role, which is even more important than before, to be a clear voice in favor of free trade, multilateralism,” said Emma Marcegaglia, president of BusinessEurope, the biggest association of European trade federations.
Resistance in some quarters to the free-trade agenda remains strong. Green Party members of the European Parliament have opposed a potential EU-Japan trade deal over fear that food contaminated by the Fukushima nuclear disaster could enter Europe. EU countries including Belgium and Poland have challenged elements of CETA.
Competing interests within industry are another obstacle. The EU has tried for almost 20 years to strike a trade deal with Mercosur, which includes Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. Last year, the EU bowed to heavy internal lobbying against opening European markets to more Latin American beef and ethanol imports, temporarily derailing talks.
Negotiations resumed this year with Mercosur and will continue next month. The EU is expected to offer new proposals to clinch a deal by year-end.
The two blocs have repeatedly failed to strike a compromise in previous negotiating rounds, but the EU’s deal with Japan signals a willingness to overcome deep divides, Brazilian Foreign Minister Aloysio Nunes Ferreira said last month in Brussels.
The EU-Japan handshake required overcoming resistance from European auto makers to opening EU markets to Japanese manufacturers. In exchange, Japan agreed to lift restrictions on EU agricultural imports, a rare capitulation on its protectionist farm policies.
Diplomats acknowledge that the often-fractious EU doesn’t fully replace the U.S. role as global beacon of free trade. Still, trade officials see a chance to claim the leadership mantle.
“I don’t know if the EU can compensate,” said Mr. Ferreira of Brazil. “But it is important to... create this pull of economic power, political power, in favor of multilateralism.”

Uncertainty On Ag And NAFTA

By Chris Clayton
DTN Ag Policy Editor

Washington (DTN) – Agriculture and food were the focus of a forum on the North American Free Trade Agreement as several Beltway insiders highlighted their concerns about the possible direction of the NAFTA renegotiation.
The U.S. exports $40 billion in U.S. agricultural products to Canada and Mexico. Canada is the second-largest market for U.S. agricultural products in 2017. Mexico is the third-largest market overall, but the largest market for U.S. corn exports.
The U.S. also imports $45 billion in agricultural products from the two countries. A lot of processed foods and proteins come from Canada while per-capita consumption of fruits and vegetables has jumped since NAFTA went into effect because of products coming into the country year-round, largely from Mexico.
Agricultural groups pointed out some of their concerns as NAFTA renegotiation talks continue later this month in Ottawa, Canada, while the U.S. still does not have a Senate-confirmed chief agricultural negotiator or a USDA undersecretary for trade.
“NAFTA is very important for producers,” said Joe Glauber, former chief economist at USDA and now a fellow with the International Food Policy Research Institute. But, he added, “This agreement is very important for consumers as well, and I think that sometimes gets overlooked.”
The large volume of fruit and vegetable imports has led to more U.S. jobs processing those products; however, some fruit and vegetable growers have been frustrated by increasing imports from Mexico. Florida growers, for instance, want to see restrictions, said Tom Stenzel, president and CEO of the United Fresh Produce Association. Stenzel said Mexican apple growers might have the same take on product restrictions as Florida tomato or strawberry growers. He also cautioned against adding language to NAFTA regarding dumping of seasonal products. He said there are other ways to help domestic producers, such as supporting the industry in the farm bill.
At the same time, domestic growers of some products have taken advantage of the imports. Stenzel pointed to avocados, which have had a 40% import increase to the U.S. under NAFTA. Yet California growers are more profitable, Stenzel said, and have taken advantage of the growing avocado demand. “If you are just strictly looking at goods and what crosses the border, you are missing the integration and the economic well-being of trade, and that goes in both directions, as well,” Stenzel said.
The value chains have also become intertwined. U.S. pork producers will import Canadian feeder pigs that are raised and processed in the U.S., then the meat is exported to Mexico or back to Canada as well, Glauber noted. “There would be a big cost to disrupt that with the imposition of tariffs and other things,” he said.
Melissa San Miguel, senior director for trade at the Grocery Manufacturers Association, reiterated that point, noting that food processing is the largest actual manufacturing sector in the U.S. in terms of jobs, but the food-processing industry has developed supply chains relying heavily on the free flow of commodities in North America.
“Our industry is particularly integrated, highly integrated, highly invested,” San Miguel said. “We have very complicated supply chains, and the consistency and the predictability of those supply chains is particularly critical to our brand, and they are not able to tolerate the kind of uncertainty around the supply chain that is already evident and could be heightened.”
Martin said NAFTA has become a lynchpin of the grain trade and is largely done in a zero-tariff environment. Martin said the NAFTA renegotiations provide an opportunity to improve the regulatory environment and force governments to improve their data systems.
Wanting to see some changes in NAFTA is the U.S. dairy industry. Jaime Castaneda, senior vice president of strategic initiatives and trade policy for the National Milk Producers Federation and U.S. Dairy Export Council, noted that the U.S. exports roughly 15% of overall dairy production, valued at about $5 billion in export sales. Still, the dairy industry hasn’t benefited as much from NAFTA.
“We’re coming from a different perspective where our members are basically saying, ‘You need to fix,’” Castaneda said.
The U.S. exports about $1 billion in dairy products to Mexico – the largest market for U.S. dairy – but most exports to Canada are largely through a complicated re-export program and the U.S. faces tariffs as high as 300% for some dairy products going into Canada. Further, Castaneda pointed to Canada changing its classes of milk prices to prevent U.S. imports but also allow Canada to dump products on the international market. Castaneda said this shouldn’t happen with a country such as Canada that has such a restrictive supply management system for dairy.
“So, for us, this is one of the most important elements of these negotiations,” he said. “If this is not addressed in these NAFTA negotiations, for us, this would be a failure. We cannot accept that Canada not only gets away with preventing our trade, but actually dumping products and affecting the international market.”
The dairy industry is also concerned about Mexico’s current negotiations with the European Union. To dairy, NAFTA is in a race to protect that $1 billion in dairy exports because the EU wants Mexico to use “geographical indicators” to restrict the use of terms such as “parmesan” and “asiago.” The EU would essentially take away the market and names that the U.S. industry helped brand in Mexico.
“So if Mexico, just like Canada, takes away the opportunity for us to sell cheeses such as parmesan or asiago or feta, that is a market access issue for us, and we cannot permit that to happen,” Castaneda said.
Castaneda pointed out that language in the Trans Pacific Partnership on intellectual property would have protected the U.S. dairy market from EU demands in Mexico, but the U.S. withdrew from that trade deal after President Donald Trump took office. Glauber added that agricultural interests in the U.S. have had to do a 180-degree turn from a year ago when talk was about approving TPP and getting a trade deal done with Europe to now protecting current market access the U.S. already built up in NAFTA.
The trade experts also pointed out that the three countries have put themselves on a tight schedule compared to the time it often takes to negotiate multi-nation trade agreements. This is more difficult considering the NAFTA talks will be heading into the third round later this month in Ottawa, Canada, while the chief agricultural negotiator in the U.S. Trade Representative’s Office and the trade undersecretary position at USDA are still unfilled. Those vacancies have disrupted communication channels between the industry and the Trump administration, said Gary Martin, president and CEO of the North American Export Grain Association.
The grain industry has been forced to use different ways of communicating messages to explain where the industry is coming from, he said.
“We have got to engage locally and have that local flow of information, well-informed information, and impact not quite so directly the process that we are used to, but today’s world is different and information moves through different channels,” Martin said.

NOAA Issues La Nina Watch Cooling Pacific May Hinder Crop Output

By Bryce Anderson
DTN Senior Ag Meteorologist

The U.S. Climate Prediction Center (CPC), a division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), says that the Pacific Ocean equator temperatures have at least a 50% chance of cooling to La Nina values by December. Accordingly, the CPC issued a La Nina watch Sept. 14.
In issuing the watch, CPC details noted an emphasis on subsurface cooling in the equator region waters of the Pacific.
“The most recent predictions... indicate the formation of La Nina as soon as the Northern Hemisphere fall 2017,” the CPC said in announcing the La Nina Watch. “Forecasters favor these predictions in part because of the recent cooling of surface and sub-surface temperature anomalies, and also because of the higher degree of forecast skill at this time of year.”
The Climate Prediction Center placed a 55 to 60% chance of La Nina forming during the Northern Hemisphere fall and winter/Southern Hemisphere spring and summer 2017-18.
Equator-region Pacific Ocean temperatures have shown a pronounced cooler trend; values catalogued Sept. 5 indicated subsurface temperatures as much as 6 degrees Celsius (about 12 degrees Fahrenheit) below normal. A combination of this deep-water cooling along with a higher track of accuracy in Pacific forecasts at this point in the year are cited as reasons for issuing the La Nina Watch.
“I think that they feel that models at this time of the year are more accurate looking ahead a couple months, which is causing them to have a little more confidence in issuing the watch,” said DTN Chief Science Officer Jeff Johnson.
The La Nina Watch may be getting the grain market’s attention. La Nina’s existence during November-January has a high correlation to sub-par crop production in southern Brazil and Argentina. Should La Nina continue into the U.S. 2018 crop year, the implication is that production could be lower.
“If 2017 weather/field conditions are roughly equivalent to 2010 (adequate subsoil moisture despite drought) when the previous La Nina formed, and 2018 becomes 2011 (reduced subsoil moisture and continued drought), and ultimately 2019 mirrors 2012 (no subsoil moisture and ongoing drought) then both soybeans and corn could be poised for substantial long-term uptrends,” DTN senior analyst Darin Newsom said.

Direct Receipts

Direct Receipts: 58,100

Texas 31,100. 97 pct over 600 lbs. 31 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 750-775 lbs 149.55; 800-835 lbs 147.77; 850 lbs 145.63; 925 lbs 135.00; Oct 625 lbs 156.50; 675 lbs 152.50; 750-775 lbs 150.06; Nov 625 lbs 156.02; 700 lbs 150.07; 750-775 lbs 146.73; 825 lbs 140.50; Dec 750-775 lbs 145.08; Del Current 725 lbs 155.43; 750-780 lbs 149.80; 800-826 lbs 147.03; 850860 lbs 144.73; 900-925 lbs 143.30; Oct 750 lbs 150.00; 800 lbs 146.78; Nov 600 lbs 160.50; 650 lbs 156.75; 725 lbs 152.86; 750-775 lbs 147.91; 800-825 lbs 145.00; Dec 750 lbs 146.06; 820 lbs 144.75; Jan 800 lbs 141.10. Medium and Large 1-2 FOB Current 580 lbs 161.20; 640 lbs 161.35, 620 lb calves 149.49; 670-690 lbs 150.82; 725-740 lbs 150.55; 750-775 lbs 146.74; 800-825 lbs 143.11; 850-875 lbs 140.69; Oct 500 lbs 155.26; 630-640 lbs 155.26; 650 lbs 149.77; 750 lbs 143.52; 800 lbs 147.25; Nov 625 lbs 163.87; 800-825 lbs 141.32; Jan 825 lbs 128.49; Del Current 500 lbs 167.75; 600-635 lbs 160.92; 675 lbs 160.92; 675 lbs 158.00; 700-725 lbs 154.46; 750-785 lbs 150.63; 800-840 lbs 144.75; 855-875 lbs 140.29; Oct 700-725 lbs 152.80; 775 lbs 152.80; 775 lbs 149.71; 800 lbs 149.00; Nov 750 lbs 150.00. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 500 lbs 142.00; 675 lbs 142.50; 725-740 lbs 142.38; Nov 650-675 lbs 143.99; 700-750 lbs 141.38; 750-775 lbs 137.80; Dec 675 lbs 141.60; 700 lbs 138.87; Del Current 650 lbs 146.12; 700 lbs 146.00; Oct 725 lbs 140.77; 750 lbs 142.00; Nov 625 lbs 148.75; 650 lbs 146.73; 725 lbs 141.87; 750 lbs 141.62; Dec 700-725 lbs 140.38; 750 lbs 141.10. Medium and Large 1-2 FOB Current 520 lbs 154.20; 675-690 lbs 144.27; 725 lbs 143.96; 750-775 lbs 137.83; 815 lbs 129.82; Oct 750 lbs 139.84; Del Current 490 lbs 157.75; 625-650 lbs 151.52; 650 lbs 145.00; 700-745 lbs 144.30; 750 lbs 139.06; Oct 700 lbs 142.00; 750 lbs 140.00; Nov 750 lbs 140.00.

Oklahoma 4200. 95 pct over 600 lbs. 53 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 665-675 lbs 154.79; 700 lbs 156.01; 750 lbs 150.00; 900 lbs 142.67; Oct 750 lbs 147.50; 800 lbs 144.28; Nov 600 lbs 157.50; 650 lbs 154.25; 750 lbs 147.50; 800 lbs 143.25; Del Current 725-735 lbs 152.51. Medium and Large 1-2 FOB Current 670 lbs 145.24; Nov 775 lbs 145.00; 800 lbs 143.15; Dec 820 lbs 141.75. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 650 lbs 143.13; 775 lbs 138.70; Nov 725 lbs 139.50; 750 lbs 138.25; Dec 700 lbs 136.99; Del Current 650-690 lbs 147.97. Medium and Large 1-2 FOB Current 600 lbs 144.85; 655-695 lbs 137.52; Nov 625 lbs 146.25.

New Mexico 1400. 100 pct over 600 lbs. 10 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 Current 725 lbs 146.50; 825 lbs 140.00; 925 lbs 134.50; Nov 775 lbs 146.50. Medium and Large 1-2 Current 800 lbs 142.97; Oct 725 lbs 151.21; 775 lbs 136.50; 800 lbs 147.25. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 Nov 725 lbs 140.50. Medium and Large 1-2 Current 750 lbs 135.88.

Kansas 7000. 100 pct over 600 lbs. 6 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 750-775 lbs 152.49; 875 lbs 145.00; 900 lbs 144.00; Oct 775 lbs 149.50; Del Current 700 lbs 158.00. Medium and Large 1-2 Del Current 640 lbs 165.50; 675 lbs 158.00; 740 lbs 153.50; 770-775 lbs 149.83; 800 lbs 144.25; Oct 725 lbs 152.50; 750 lbs 148.50; Jan 825 lbs 131.00. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 FOB Current 700-725 lbs 144.67; Del 775 lbs 141.00.

National Feeder Cattle Summary

St. Joseph, MO — September 15
National feeder cattle receipts:193,100

Steers and heifers traded mostly steady to $6 higher. Demand was moderate to very good, with active trade. Demand has remained good for the past several weeks, as grain is readily available and at relatively cheap prices. On Sept. 13 at the Hub City Livestock Auction in Aberdeen, South Dakota, buyers had the opportunity to choose from a large supply of quality cattle. There were some noteworthy sales, with nearly three and a half loads of steers weighing an average of 942 pounds selling at $157.10. CME live and feeder cattle futures traded mixed throughout the week. Compared to Sept. 8, October live cattle futures closed 43 points higher at $107.75 and December was $112.82, 3 points lower. Feeder cattle futures held triple digit gains from the week. Compared to Sept. 8, September futures closed $2.35 higher at $147.87 and October was $148.42, up $2.23. On Sept. 14, cash trade in Nebraska was limited on moderate demand with a few dressed sales from $167-168. However, there were not enough for a market trend. Sept. 8 in Nebraska live sales were at $105, with dressed sales from $165-168 on a light test. So far the for the week, trading has been at a standstill in the Southern Plains. Sept. 8 in the Southern Plains, live trades were $105 with a light test noted in Kansas. Harvest is officially in full swing, with corn harvest reported as 60 percent complete in Texas, 10 percent in Kansas and 12 percent in Missouri. NASS’s Crop Production Report was released on Sept. 12. Corn production is projected at 14.2 billion bushels, with an expected average yield of 169.9 bushels per acre. Soybean production is estimated at 4.43 billion bushels, with an expected average yield of 49.9 bushels per acre. Both corn and soybean yields are slightly higher than August, but lower than last year. Throughout Montana, snow is falling with many mountain passes anticipating 8 inches of snow by Sept. 16 and 12 to 18 inches expected above pass level. This is welcomed moisture, as the state has been engulfed in wildfires due to drought. Hopefully the snow can provide relief to the area, as there is currently 22 fires burning in the state, impacting over 580,000 acres. USDA’s monthly World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) Report was released on Sept. 12. U.S. beef production for 2017 saw a decrease of 140 million pounds, with production now at 26.559 billion pounds. Production also declined for 2018, now at 27.275 billion pounds, down 85 million pounds. One of the driving factors to this is reduced slaughter weights. Although total slaughter headcounts have been at or above last year’s numbers, slaughter weights have been declining. The increase in headcount is not enough to offset the lower slaughter weights, leading to a decline in production. On Sept. 12, the Choice-Select spread was negative 7 cents, with Choice boxed-beef at $190.79 and Select boxed-beef at $190.86. This was short-lived, as today’s Choice-Select spread closed at $5.57. Compared to Sept. 8, Choice boxed-beef closed at $191.42, dn .46 and Select boxed-beef was dn 4.12 at $185.85.
Texas 7600. 72 pct over 600 lbs. 42 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 350-400 lbs (381) 184.42; 400-450 lbs (426) 177.69; 450-500 lbs (479) 179.31; 500-550 lbs (524) 165.56; 550-600 lbs (594) 143.92; 600-650 lbs (621) 150.38; 650-700 lbs (679) 136.86; 700-750 lbs (722) 150.69; 750-800 lbs (768) 148.74; 800-850 lbs (828) 148.38; 850-900 lbs (860) 142.93; 900-950 lbs (922) 138.01; 950-1000 lbs (981) 129.81. Medium and Large 1-2 400-450 lbs (431) 166.51; 500-550 lbs (527) 148.99; 550-600 lbs (576) 145.13; 600-650 lbs (631) 133.37; 650-700 lbs (683) 140.19; 700-750 lbs (718) 132.27; 750-800 lbs (775) 141.37; part load 990 lbs 133.50. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (325) 180.46; 350-400 lbs (371) 168.59; 450-500 lbs (479) 151.70; 500-550 lbs (523) 142.01; 550-600 lbs (565) 137.89; 600-650 lbs (617) 141.06; 650-700 lbs (673) 136.64; 700-750 lbs (723) 133.92; 750-800 lbs (767) 138.33; 1000-1050 lbs (1022) 117.73. Medium and Large 1-2 400-450 lbs (429) 146.52; 450-500 lbs (480) 140.62; 500-550 lbs (530) 135.09; 550-600 lbs (570) 131.89; 600-650 lbs (628) 135.14; 750-800 lbs (764) 133.18; 800-850 lbs (816) 134.59.
Oklahoma 33,600. 65 pct over 600 lbs. 36 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (321) 208.42; 350-400 lbs (373) 193.26; 400-450 lbs (421) 183.30; 450-500 lbs (470) 171.41; 500-550 lbs (523) 166.65; 550-600 lbs (574) 161.26; 600-650 lbs (620) 161.74; 650-700 lbs (674) 158.46; 700-750 lbs (725) 155.67; 750-800 lbs (766) 152.66; 800-850 lbs (821) 149.41; 850-900 lbs (879) 144.46; 900-950 lbs (911) 140.77; 950-1000 lbs (984) 133.99; 1000-1050 lbs (1035) 129.88. Medium and Large 1-2 300350 lbs (317) 204.47; 350-400 lbs (377) 193.54; 400-450 lbs (423) 182.94; 450-500 lbs (478) 166.57; 500-550 lbs (530) 158.07; 550-600 lbs (573) 151.76; 600-650 lbs (624) 151.75; 650-700 lbs (683) 151.42; 700-750 lbs (723) 150.11; 750-800 lbs (772) 147.92; 800-850 lbs (821) 144.38; 850-900 lbs (869) 139.61; 900-950 lbs (929) 136.57; 950-1000 lbs (981) 131.55. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (319) 166.16; 350400 lbs (371) 157.93; 400-450 lbs (419) 152.52; 450-500 lbs (470) 148.92; 500-550 lbs (521) 144.07; 550-600 lbs (565) 145.32; 600-650 lbs (624) 147.02; 650-700 lbs (679) 146.69; 700-750 lbs (723) 141.09; 750-800 lbs (777) 138.07; 800-850 lbs (823) 133.01; 850-900 lbs (881) 129.66; 900-950 lbs (916) 123.37; 950-1000 lbs (960) 124.84. Medium and Large 1-2 300-350 lbs (334) 158.01; 350-400 lbs (377) 156.35; 400-450 lbs (425) 147.54; 450-500 lbs (477) 144.94; 500-550 lbs (526) 139.68; 550-600 lbs (576) 139.14; 600-650 lbs (627) 139.73; 650-700 lbs (674) 139.26; 700-750 lbs (736) 136.40; 750-800 lbs (776) 135.62; 800-850 lbs (809) 127.31.
New Mexico 3700. 48 pct over 600 lbs. 41 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (328) 205.92; 400-450 lbs (422) 177.61; 450-500 lbs (478) 167.05; 500-550 lbs (518) 162.64; 550-600 lbs (575) 155.17; part load 728 lbs 144.00; few loads 836 lbs 145.00. Medium and Large 1-2 350-400 lbs (376) 184.95; 450-500 lbs (468) 161.97; 500-550 lbs (519) 159.24; 550-600 lbs (573) 153.43; 650-700 lbs (675) 146.06; 700-750 lbs (732) 148.10. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 350-400 lbs (378) 169.61; 450-500 lbs (474) 151.78; 500-550 lbs (522) 146.97; 550-600 lbs (565) 143.49; 800-850 lbs (803) 128.58. Medium and Large 1-2 350-400 lbs (365) 160.44; 400-450 lbs (436) 151.69; 450-500 lbs (470) 149.57; 750-800 lbs (765) 130.83.
Kansas 11,300. 92 pct over 600 lbs. 32 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 450-500 lbs (462) 185.30; 500-550 lbs (519) 172.47; 550-600 lbs (572) 165.81; 600-650 lbs (617) 165.48; 650-700 lbs (681) 162.92; 700-750 lbs (724) 157.38; 750-800 lbs (777) 155.29; 800-850 lbs (824) 152.72; 850-900 lbs (871) 154.44; 900-950 lbs (917) 149.12; 950-1000 lbs (984) 139.72; 1000-1050 lbs (1034) 135.34. Medium and Large 1-2 450-500 lbs (478) 169.08; 500-550 lbs (536) 163.39; 600-650 lbs (628) 151.64; 650-700 lbs (685) 154.99; 700-750 lbs (728) 149.03; 750-800 lbs (784) 149.41; 800-850 lbs (830) 146.07; 850-900 lbs (866) 144.66; 900-950 lbs (921) 138.40; 950-1000 lbs (989) 134.93. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 350-400 lbs (383) 180.89; 400-450 lbs (416) 168.45; 550-600 lbs (567) 157.85; 600-650 lbs (628) 151.59; 650-700 lbs (679) 149.46; 700-750 lbs (726) 143.68; 750-800 lbs (775) 141.96; 800-850 lbs (828) 136.73; 850-900 lbs (881) 132.19; 950-1000 lbs (971) 133.04. Medium and Large 1-2 450-500 lbs (487) 158.11; 550-600 lbs (575) 147.22; 600-650 lbs (629) 145.69; 650-700 lbs (669) 142.86; 700-750 lbs (742) 137.18; 750-800 lbs (775) 136.02; 800-850 lbs (818) 133.50; 850-900 lbs (879) 128.87.
Missouri 37,200. 56 pct over 600 lbs. 39 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (327) 197.66; 350-400 lbs (374) 188.16; 400-450 lbs (427) 183.60; 450-500 lbs (472) 175.68; 500-550 lbs (524) 170.36; 550-600 lbs (577) 164.91; 600-650 lbs (623) 161.33; 650-700 lbs (673) 159.18; 700-750 lbs (722) 156.52; 750-800 lbs (774) 153.99; 800-850 lbs (816) 150.12; 850-900 lbs (871) 144.37; 900-950 lbs (934) 142.57; 950-1000 lbs (988) 129.91. Medium and Large 1-2 300-350 lbs (326) 175.40; 350-400 lbs (378) 171.79; 400-450 lbs (427) 166.65; 450-500 lbs (475) 162.85; 500-550 lbs (523) 161.12; 550-600 lbs (574) 151.60; 600-650 lbs (624) 152.52; 650-700 lbs (675) 151.51; 700-750 lbs (725) 147.73; 750-800 lbs (782) 149.36; 800-850 lbs (819) 141.95; 850-900 lbs (875) 133.58; 900-950 lbs (913) 137.51; 950-1000 lbs (959) 131.72. Holstein Steers: Large 3 450-500 lbs (475) 95.08; 550-600 lbs (581) 97.00; 600-650 lbs (616) 90.45; 650-700 lbs (657) 92.06; 700-750 lbs (731) 84.28; 950-1000 lbs (976) 84.00. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (319) 175.38; 350-400 lbs (374) 165.46; 400-450 lbs (424) 159.42; 450-500 lbs (477) 152.69; 500-550 lbs (526) 149.90; 550-600 lbs (575) 148.42; 600-650 lbs (621) 149.42; 650-700 lbs (672) 148.49; 700-750 lbs (726) 140.36; 750-800 lbs (780) 136.24; 800-850 lbs (824) 132.07; 850-900 lbs (864) 131.89; 900-950 lbs (914) 127.40. Medium and Large 1-2 300-350 lbs (331) 158.02; 350-400 lbs (377) 157.03; 400-450 lbs (430) 149.36; 450-500 lbs (477) 146.00; 500-550 lbs (522) 144.76; 550-600 lbs (573) 142.96; 600-650 lbs (619) 141.12; 650-700 lbs (673) 141.14; 700-750 lbs (718) 137.13; 750-800 lbs (771) 133.43; 800-850 lbs (832) 134.31; 850-900 lbs (874) 127.63.
Arkansas 6200. 22 pct over 600 lbs. 39 pct heifers. Steers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (324) 193.79; 350-400 lbs (372) 180.16; 400-450 lbs (424) 170.00; 450-500 lbs (472) 159.39; 500-550 lbs (522) 152.74; 550-600 lbs (572) 148.22; 600-650 lbs (621) 145.08; 650-700 lbs (677) 142.42. Heifers: Medium and Large 1 300-350 lbs (329) 160.09; 350-400 lbs (372) 151.39; 400-450 lbs (424) 146.48; 450-500 lbs (474) 139.80; 500-550 lbs (522) 138.70; 550-600 lbs (572) 136.12; 600-650 lbs (621) 133.37; 650-700 lbs (672) 130.99.

 

 

 

 

 

logo
Thursday, September 21, 2017 11:36 AM