Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T05:26:30.270Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Management of Intensive Forage-Beef Production Under Yield Uncertainty

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2016

C. Arden Pope III  and
C. Richard Shumway
C. Arden Pope III
Affiliation:
Agricultural Economics Department, Brigham Young University
C. Richard Shumway
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Texas A & M University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Forage production variability is incorporated into a decision theory framework for a beef producer in East Texas. The results suggest that the least risky, and also the most profitable, approach to intensive forage beef production is to plan for relatively poor weather conditions and low forage production. This results in a more diverse forage system and a smaller herd size than would be found optimal under the assumption of constant average forage production. These results also demonstrate that the assumption of constant average forage production may result in grossly exaggerated estimates of expected net returns.

Keywords

production uncertaintydecision theorybeefforage
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , December 1984 , pp. 37 - 44
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agrawal, R. C. and Heady, E. O. Operations Research Methods for Agricultural Decisions, Ames, Iowa: The Iowa State University Press, 1972.Google Scholar
Albrecht, D. and Ladewig, H.. Texas Agriculture: A Statewide Overview of Its Importance, Diversity, and Changing Structure, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Rural Sociology DTR 82-2, 1982.Google Scholar
Bentley, E. and Shumway, C. R. “Adaptive Planning Over the Cattle Price Cycle.” So. J. Agr. Econ., 13 No. 1, (1981):139–148.Google Scholar
Conrad, H. R., Hibbs, J. W., and Pratt, A. D. “Regulation of Feed Intake in Dairy Cows: Association Between Digestible Dry Matter Intake and Cellulose Digestibility in Cows Fed Increasing Levels of Grain Concentrate.” J. of Dairy Sci., 49(1966):1038–1042.Google Scholar
Degroot, M. H. Optimal Statistical Decisions, New York, N. Y.: McGraw-Hill, 1970.Google Scholar
Eidman, V. R., Dean, J. W., and Carter, H. O. “Application of Statistical Decision Theory to Commercial Turkey Production.” J. of Farm Econ., 49(1967):852–868.Google Scholar
Freund, R. J. “The Introduction of Risk into a Programming Model.” Econometrica, 24(1956):253–264.Google Scholar
Gardner, B. and Chavas, J. P. “Market Equilibrium with Random Production.” Paper presented at the American Agricultural Economics Association meetings, Pullman, Washington, August 1979.(Abstract in Amer. J. Agr. Econ., 61(1979):1142.)Google Scholar
Hadar, J. and Russell, W.. “Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects.” Amer. Econ. Rev., 59(1969);25–34.Google Scholar
Hazell, P. B. R. “A Linear Alternative to Quadratic and Semivariance Programming for Farm Planning Under Uncertainty.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ., 53(1971):53–62.Google Scholar
Hey, J. D. Uncertainty in Microeconomics, New York, New York: New York University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
Lineban, P. A.“Use of Cage and Mower Strip Methods for Measuring the Forage Consumed by Grazing Animals.” Proceeding of the Sixth International Grassland Conference, State College, Pennsylvania, 2(1952):1328–1333.Google Scholar
Maddox, L. A. Nutrient Requirements of the Cow and Calf, Texas Agricultural Extension Service B-1044, November, 1965.Google Scholar
McCartor, M. M. and Rouquette, F. M. “Forage and Animal Production Programs for East Texas.” Chapter 9 in Grasses and Legumes in Texas—Development, Production, and Utilization, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Monograph 6, January, 1976.Google Scholar
National Academy of Science. Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle, Fifth revised edition, 1976.Google Scholar
National Climatic Data Center. Climatology of the United States, No. 81, Monthly Normals of Temperance, Precipitation, and Heating and Cooling Degree Days, 1951-1980, Texas (unpublished supplement data set). Ashville, North Carolina.Google Scholar
Pope, C. A., Bhide, S., and Heady, E. O. “Economic of Conservation Tillage in Iowa.” J. Soil and Water Cons., 38(1983):370–373.Google Scholar
Pope, R. D.“Supply Response and the Dispersion of Price Expectations.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ., 63(1981):161–163.Google Scholar
Richardson, J. W. and Condra, G. D. “Farm Size Evaluation in the El Paso Valley: A Survival/Success Approach.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ., 63(1981):430–437.Google Scholar
Rouquette, F. M. and Florence, M. J. “Animal Performance from Common and Coastal Bermudagrass Stocked at Three Levels of Forage Availability.” Forage and Beef Cattle Research, 1980 ■ Overton, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Research Center Technical Report No. 80-1, (May, 1980):44–48.Google Scholar
Saez, R. R., Shumway, C. R., Rouquette, J. Jr., and Jones, L. L.. Profit Potential and Risks in Intensified Forage-Beef Production, East Texas, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Agricultural Economics DTR 81-4, June 1981.Google Scholar
Tauer, L. W.“Target MOTAD.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ., 65(1983):606–610.Google Scholar
Texas Agricultural Extension Service. Crop and Livestock Budgets, Northeast and Deep East Texas, 1979.Google Scholar
Texas Department of Agriculture. Texas Prices Received and Paid by Farmers., 1979.Google Scholar
Texas Department of Agriculture. Texas Custom Rates Statistics, 1981.Google Scholar
U. S. Department of Agriculture. Farm Index, Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives Service, December, 1979.Google Scholar
U. S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Prices. Annual Summary. Statistical Reporting Service, 1967, 1978.Google Scholar