News Update
October 4, 2011
Angus Board Approves Long-Range Strategic Plan
After more than a century of expansion, the Angus breed has become one of American agriculture’s greatest success stories — a story of quality, demand and innovation.
Today, more than 60% of cattlemen identify their herd as Angus, and those Angus-sired calves continue to put more money back into the pockets of cow-calf producers than any other breed — approximately $35 more per head than non-Angus contemporaries, according to a recent 10-year study. And thanks to branded beef programs like Certified Angus Beef LLC (CAB), “Angus” has become a household name.
Indeed, the breed is thriving, but Association President Joe Hampton says Angus success won’t be taken for granted.
“Our success, like most successful business models, has always depended on our ability to adapt, to innovate. That’s what will carry us into the future,” Hampton says. “The American Angus Association must remain open to new ideas and new opportunities for growth and relevance.”
With an eye toward the future, the American Angus Association Board of Directors approved a long-range strategic plan geared toward growing the relevance of the Angus breed.
The plan outlines strategies for the nation’s largest beef breed association for the next 5-10 years — strategies aimed at benefiting all users of Angus genetics, from members to commercial cattlemen to consumers.
In fact, many of these Angus stakeholders ultimately shaped the Association’s long-range initiative, Hampton notes.
“This is the first time in the history of this organization where so much effort has gone into collecting input from our members, their commercial customers and others with an interest in the Angus business,” he says. “Through this input, the people who will ultimately benefit from our long-range plan are also those who helped to build it. Their vision for the future of this breed is interwoven into our outlined strategies, and that’s key to the success of the plan — and the success of the Business Breed.”
The initiative is months in the making. The Board first announced the long-range planning process in fall 2010 and began collecting comments from members, their customers and other industry representatives in January 2011. Surveys were included in the Angus Journal and online at www.angus.org, and additional input was gained through a series of listening sessions and individual comments collected by Board members.
“The input gained from the long-range planning process was as insightful as it was valuable,” Association CEO Bryce Schumann says. “Thanks to this process and the dedication of our members who are so invested in the success of this breed, we now have an outline for our organization’s goals and how to accomplish them.”
The strategic intent of the plan focuses on an overarching effort to increase member success and profitability by:
- growing registered Angus demand;
- increasing marketing and education efforts;
- fostering development and use of technology;
- leveraging entity resources and expertise; and
- rowing the industry leadership role of the Association and its entities.
With this in mind, Hampton says long-range strategies focus on the Angus breed’s core sectors: seedstock breeders, commercial cow-calf operators, feeders/stockers, consumers and youth.
Several key initiatives have emerged to advance marketing, education, and technology and research. They include the development of: 1) reproductive trait data and voluntary inventory-based reporting in order to form longevity and fertility measures; 2) an education and culinary center to advance beef knowledge and Certified Angus Beef® (CAB®) brand recognition among retail and foodservice partners as well as consumers; 3) an expanded Angus television presence that provides educational programming and marketing services for Angus breeders and their commercial customers while growing the Angus brand; and 4) the development of genomic resources to benefit commercial cattlemen and expand their use of Angus genetics.
“With time, these initial projects will undoubtedly accompany other beneficial initiatives identified and executed by Association staff and leaders,” Schumann says. “We continue to welcome additional input from our members and others as time progresses. That communication is imperative to the future success of any organization, especially our member-driven Association and its entities.”
Click here to view the American Angus Association’s 2011 Long-Range Strategic Plan.
Contact the American Angus Association at 816-383-5100 or visit http://www.angus.org for the complete Long-Range Strategic Plan or for more information.
Texas Crop, Weather: Climatologist Says Drought
Could Last 10 Years
Another year of drought, or even five to 10 years more drought? The first is highly likely, and the second, though harder to predict, a strong possibility, according to John Nielsen-Gammon, state climatologist.
Regarding the drought continuing through this winter and spring, everyone is watching what appears to be a new La Niña developing, Nielsen-Gammon said.
But a strong Pacific Ocean La Niña is not the only phenomenon that affects Texas droughts, he said. Scientists now believe that Atlantic Ocean temperature oscillations also play a role in long-term droughts such as the one that hammered Texas and the Midwest in the middle of the last century.
Climatologists have found a strong correlation between Pacific Ocean surface temperatures and some events like the Dust Bowl drought. But the drought of the 1950s, which rivaled the current drought, did not show up in the computer simulations correlated with Pacific Ocean La Niña events. The simulations did find, however, that patterns that strongly suggested warmer-than-average North Atlantic sea-surface temperatures also contributed to droughts in parts of North America, Texas included, according to Nielsen-Gammon.
“Compared to the trend, the north Atlantic is warm in the 1940s and 1950s, cool in the 1970s and 1980s, and warm since 1995,” he said. “A cool North Atlantic implies a wet North America, amplifying the response to an El Niño.”
According to a similar study, drought in Texas has been overwhelmingly more frequent when there is a negative Pacific Ocean La Niña event and a warm North Atlantic, such as was in place during the 1950s.
All this may seem a bit esoteric to any but a professional climatologist, Nielson-Gammon said, particularly as there is currently no proven way of forecasting long-term ocean variability in the Pacific or North Atlantic.
“We do know that the current temperature patterns are not a death sentence for non-stop drought,” Nielson-Gammon writes in his blog, The Climate Abyss. ”But we have heightened drought susceptibility during this period, and, according to some studies, the effect of La Niña is likely to be amplified. … So this coming year looks very likely to be another dry one, and consequently it is very likely that next summer will have water shortages and drought problems even more severe than this summer.”
And what about the long-term picture?
“At this point, all I can say is that we’re in a period of frequent Texas drought until further notice,” he said. “This period, with both the Pacific and Atlantic working against us, might be over in a couple of years, or it might last another 15 or 20 years. It seems likely to last another decade.”
More information on the current Texas drought and wildfire alerts can be found on the AgriLife Extension Agricultural Drought Task Force website at http://agrilife.tamu.edu/drought/.
Certain Biofuel Mandates Unlikely to be Met by 2022 Unless New Technologies, Policies Developed
It is unlikely the United States will meet some specific biofuel mandates under the current Renewable Fuel Standard by 2022 unless innovative technologies are developed or policies change, says a new congressionally requested report from the National Research Council (NRC), which adds that the standard may be an ineffective policy for reducing global greenhouse gas emissions. Achieving this standard would likely increase federal budget outlays, as well as have mixed economic and environmental effects.
In 2005, Congress enacted the Renewable Fuel Standard as part of the Energy Policy Act and amended it in the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act. The amended standard mandated that by 2022 the consumption volume of the renewable fuels should consist of:
- 15 billion gallons (gal.) of conventional biofuels, mainly corn-grain ethanol;
- 1 billion gal. of biomass-based diesel fuel;
- 4 billion gal. of advanced renewable biofuels, other than ethanol derived from cornstarch, that achieve a life-cycle greenhouse gas threshold of at least 50%; and
- 16 billion gal. of cellulosic biofuels produced from wood, grasses or non-edible plant parts — such as from cornstalks and wheat straw.
Except for biodiesel, these volumes are measured in ethanol units.
The committee that wrote the report said that production of adequate volumes of biofuels are expected to meet consumption mandates for conventional biofuels and biomass-based diesel fuel. However, whether and how the mandate for cellulosic biofuels will be met is uncertain. Currently, no commercially viable biorefineries exist for converting cellulosic biomass to fuel. The capacity to meet the renewable fuel mandate for cellulosic biofuels will not be available unless the production process is unexpectedly improved and technologies are scaled up and undergo several commercial-scale demonstrations in the next few years. Additionally, policy uncertainties and high costs of production may deter investors from aggressive deployment, even though the government guarantees a market for cellulosic biofuels up to the level of the consumption mandate, regardless of price.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The extent to which using biofuels rather than petroleum will reduce greenhouse gas emissions is uncertain, the report says. How biofuels are produced and the changes in land use or land cover that occur in the process affect biofuels’ impact on such emissions. Dedicated energy crops will have to be grown to meet the mandate, which will probably require conversion of uncultivated land or the displacement of commodity crops and pastures. If the expanded production involves removing perennial vegetation on a piece of land and replacing it with an annual commodity crop, then the land-use change would incur a one-time greenhouse gas emission from biomass and soil that could be large enough to offset benefits gained by displacing petroleum-based fuels with biofuels over subsequent years. Such land conversion may disrupt any future potential for storing carbon in biomass and soil. In addition, the renewable fuel standard can neither prevent market-mediated effects nor control land-use or land-cover changes in other countries.
Economic Effects
Only in an economic environment characterized by high oil prices, technological breakthroughs, and a high implicit or actual carbon price would biofuels be cost-competitive with petroleum-based fuels, the committee concluded. The best cost estimates of cellulosic biofuel are not economical compared with fossil fuels when crude oil’s price is $111 per barrel. Furthermore, absent major increases in agricultural yields and improved efficiency in converting biomass to fuels, additional cropland will be required for growing cellulosic feedstock. This could create competition among different land uses and, in turn, raise cropland prices.
In addition, achieving the renewable fuel standard would increase the federal budget outlays, mostly as a result of increased spending on grants, loans, loan guarantees, and other payments to support the development of cellulosic biofuels and foregone revenue as a result of biofuel tax credits. Moreover, nutritional and other income assistance programs are often adjusted for changes in the general price level. If food retail prices go up, expenses could increase for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Special Supplemental Assistance Program for Women, Infants, and Children, as well as for much larger income assistance programs, such as Social Security, military and civilian retirement programs, and Supplemental Security Income Program. Nevertheless, given that biofuels are only one of many factors affecting food retail prices, it will be hard to attribute any future increases in program costs to the standard alone.
Environmental Effects
Although biofuels hold potential for providing net environmental benefits compared with using petroleum-based fuels, specific environmental outcomes from increasing biofuels production to meet the renewable fuel consumption mandate cannot be guaranteed. The type of feedstocks produced, management practices used, land-use changes that feedstock production might incur, and such site-specific details as prior land use and regional water availability will determine the mandate’s environmental effects, the report says. Biofuels production has been shown to have both positive and negative effects on water quality, soil and biodiversity. However, air-quality modeling suggests that production and use of ethanol to displace gasoline is likely to increase air pollutants such as particulate matter, ozone and sulfur oxides. In addition, published estimates of water use over the life cycle of corn-grain ethanol are higher than petroleum-based fuels.
Barriers and Opportunities
Key barriers to achieving the renewable fuel mandate are the high cost of producing cellulosic biofuels compared with petroleum-based fuels and uncertainties in future biofuel markets, the report finds. Biofuel production is contingent on subsidies, the nature of the mandate, and similar policies. Although the mandate guarantees a market for the cellulosic biofuels produced, even at costs considerably higher than fossil fuels, uncertainties in enforcement and implementation of the mandated levels affect investors’ confidence and discourage investment. To reduce costs of biofuels, the committee suggested carrying out research and development to improve feedstock yield and increasing the conversion yield from biomass to fuels.
The study was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), U.S. Department of Energy, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine, and NRC make up the National Academies. They are independent, nonprofit institutions that provide science, technology, and health policy advice under an 1863 congressional charter. Panel members, who serve pro bono as volunteers, are chosen by the Academies for each study based on their expertise and experience and must satisfy the Academies’ conflict-of-interest standards. The resulting consensus reports undergo external peer review before completion. For more information, visit http://national-academies.org/
studycommitteprocess.pdf.
Editor’s Note: The articles used within this site represent a mixture of copyrights. If you would like to reprint or repost an article, you must first request permission of Angus Productions Inc. (API) by contacting the editor at 816-383-5200; 3201 Frederick Ave., Saint Joseph, MO 64506. API claims copyright to this web site as presented. We welcome educational venues and cattlemen to link to this site as a service to their audience.