Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

how that price was derived from the producer through the feeder, through the packers, and the supermarkets? Do we have a chart of that kind?

Mr. FARRIS. Yes, I have put these figures together. I don't, however, have it in our statement.

Mr. ULLMAN. Could you prepare for us that kind of a chart?
Mr. FARRIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. ULLMAN. It would be helpful to us in pinpointing the problem. [The information follows:]

[blocks in formation]

1 Average price per 100 lbs liveweight of choice grade steers at 7 leading public stockyards and average of quotations to California feeders and ranchers.

2 Weighted average of price quotations for choice grade carcasses at Chicago plus 75 cents per 100 lbs and at Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle-Tacoma-Portland.

* Estimated weighted average price of retail cuts from choice grade carcass.

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, livestock and meat statistics, and miscellaneous Publication No. 1174 price spreads for beef and pork-Revised series 1949-69.

Mr. ULLMAN. I yield to my colleague, Mr. Burke.

Mr. BURKE. Will you also include the prices and information on hides?

We have had quite a problem back in my area. The tanneries can't seem to get hides. I thought you people might be able to tell us why..

How much are you getting for overseas hides in comparison to domestic prices?

Mr. CREER. Yes.

Mr. ULLMAN. You can get us some information on that. My friend from Massachusetts is always protective of his shoe manufacturers, and what they are paying for their raw materials.

Mr. BURKE. What they are concerned about is the fact that they have not been able to buy hides. They claim the hides are going overseas. They say you are getting a higher price for them over there, and are not selling them to the domestic tanneries.

I would like to have a little résumé of information there to tell what they are doing with them.

Mr. ULLMAN. Thank you. The record will be held open for that purpose.

[The following was submitted for the record :]

[blocks in formation]

Source: 1969 Business Statistics and Survey of Current Business, both publications of U.S. Department of Commerce. Note: Prices are wholesale, fob shipping point for hides, steer, heavy, native over 53 lbs.

[blocks in formation]

Source: Livestock and Meat Situation, publication of Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Source: "1972 Handbook of Agricultural Charts," Agriculture Handbook No. 439, USDA.

92-606-73-pt. 3-11

[merged small][graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Source: "1972 Handbook of Agricultural Charts," Agriculture Handbook No. 439, USDA.

[From Foreign Agriculture, Mar. 19, 1973]

PRICE SPIRAL HIT CATTLE HIDE MARKET IN 1972

(By Roger S. Lowen, Livestock and Meat Products Division, Foreign

Agricultural Service)

The world market for cattle hides last year was gripped by one of its periodic, but unusually strong, price spurts, which saw U.S. prices soar to alltime highs triple the 1971 average.

Although it is difficult to sort out all aspects of the complex supply-demand situation behind this spiral, certain factors stand out.

Demand last year was very strong, as seen in a sharp rise in both quantity and price of U.S. exports, which soared to a record 18.0 million cattle hides. Supply, on the other hand, continued its very slow growth of recent years, and some trade

distortions arose as a result of export restrictions in Argentina, Brazil, and other countries.

The latter development has come about as a result of developing countries with large livestock industries attempting to direct more of their hide production into local manufacturing rather than the world market-a trend that is expected to continue over the years. This, in turn, will have a tendency to shift production of leather goods out of countries like Italy and Spain that depend on the world market for large amounts of raw material.

A further complication is that the supply of hides is not responsive to demand, since hides are byproducts of meat production and dependent on cattle herd buildup, which is slow even under the best of conditions.

During 1972, Chicago prices for heavy native steer hide (a standard type of hide) skyrocketed from the 14.4 cents-per-pound average for 1971 to a peak of 46 cents during the first 2 days of November. At that point, they dropped sharply, skidding to 32 cents by mid-December. Prices remained close to that level through the first week of February and then eased to 30 cents in early March.

This upsurge in 1972 hides prices had a mixed impact.

After years of relatively low prices, livestock producers, meat packers, and exporters enjoyed substantially larger receipts for cattle hides. The U.S. trade balance was helped by a surge in export earnings from $129 million in 1971 to $264 million in 1972.

Domestic leather tanners and shoe manufacturers, on the other hand, fear that increased cattle hide costs could lead to further reductions in domestic shoe production, expanded shoe imports, higher retail prices for shoes, and increased unemployment within the industry. Even during the past decade of relatively low cattle hide prices and ample supply, domestic "wettings" by tanners and domestic production of shoes declined about 10 percent. At the same time, imports of nonrubber shoes surged to 260 million pairs, or one-third of domestic consumption. Extreme fluctuations have not been typical of the past 5 years, when cattle hide prices remained relatively stable at low levels, but they occurred regularly in the more distant past.

In 1965, for instance, monthly average prices almost doubled, climbing from a low of 10 cents per pound to over 19 cents. They continued to mount in 1966, leading the U.S. Government for the first time in history to impose restrictions on hide exports, and then fell almost as rapidly.

During the Korean War era-when prices reached levels close to those prevailing in 1972-a steep rise from about 21 cents in April 1950 to 37 cents the following January culminated in an even sharper drop. This long decline ended with a low of 11 cents reached in April 1952.

These changes in prices have been accompanied by shifts in the value of hides and skins relative to other livestock products. Until 1950, cattle hides (on a cents-per-pound basis) sold at prices equal to or substantially higher than live cattle. After 1950, cattle hide prices trailed those for live cattle occasionally by as much as 50 percent. During the better part of 1972 prices of cattle hides approximated or exceeded those of live cattle. Now they again trail by about 25 percent.

A number of reasons have been advanced for last year's price rise. In the developing world, demand for leather products is an outgrowth of the economic progress being made, especially since one of the first acts of subsistence level citizens is to purchase shoes when they enter the money economy. In Europe and America, leather boots, clothing, and accessories have gained in popularity. Also, interest in ecology and natural, as opposed to synthetic materials, has increased demand for a wide variety of leather products.

This demand has been reflected in the increased buying of hides and skins on the world market and the emergence of leather and leather-product industries in a number of the developing countries.

Among the importers, Japan-the world's largest-increased its total cattle hide imports in 1972 from the 422 million pounds purchased in 1971; a decade earlier, by comparison, its imports totaled only 259 million. Italy-the second largest importer-took 358 million pounds in 1971, compared with 194 million in 1962. A number of other importers, including Mexico and Spain, have also stepped up purchases over the years, and the U.S.S.R. has remained a large importer-156 million pounds in 1971-although its purchases have been rather erratic, reflecting variances in domestic cattle slaughter.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »