Author
Listed:
- Nott, Sherrill B.
- Wolf, Christopher A.
Abstract
By early 2000, the number of commercial livestock herds in Michigan with bovine tuberculosis (TB) had increased to the point that policy makers were considering alternative ways to enable farmers to continue production with access to markets while eliminating TB and protecting the public's health. If at least one animal on a farm is found to have TB, a farmer currently has two choices about the future assuming the goal is to stay in the livestock business. Alternative one is depopulation; all animals are removed to a state facility, slaughtered, and tested. A new herd may be purchased after a state supervised clean up and waiting period is completed; this may take one year. Alternative two is test and remove; a recurring series of testing is initiated, but only individual reactor or suspect animals are removed for slaughter and further testing. In both alternatives, regulations allow indemnity payments to be made to the owner by the state and federal governments. This paper analyzes the financial impact of each alternative on two dairy benchmark farms. One has 75 milk cows, the other 150. Monthly cash flow projections for two years were made using FINFLO. A base projection was compared to the above alternatives assuming constant herd size (except for the impact of TB) and constant price levels. The main goal was to illustrate how a farmer might analyze the alternatives if faced with TB infected animals. The 75 cow farm started with $8,309 of cash on January 1, 2000. The base projections resulted in cash of $34,230 by December 31, 2001. Ending cash after two years for depopulation or test and remove were $16,095 and $15,801, respectively. The 75 cow farm started with a net worth of $624,940 on January 1, 2000. The base projection increased net worth by $66,542 over the two years. For depopulation or test and remove, the change in net worth by the end of 2001 was $-15,345 and $48,256, respectively. The 150 cow farm started with $30,659 of cash on January 1, 2000. The base projections resulted in cash of $40,437 by December 31, 2001. Ending cash after two years for depopulation or test and remove were $2,972 and $13,290, respectively. The 150 cow farm started with a net worth of $1,122,940 on January 1, 2000. The base projection increased net worth by $31,765 over the two years. For depopulation or test and remove, the change in net worth by the end of 2001 was $-95,904 and $-1,925, respectively. Benchmark model farms will not exactly fit any particular farm. Each owner faced with TB should make their own projections using their unique situation and timing of cash flows. Once an alternative is adopted, monthly financial comparison sheets can be helpful in managing the transition to TB free status.
Suggested Citation
Nott, Sherrill B. & Wolf, Christopher A., 2000.
"Dairy Farm Decisions On How To Proceed In The Face Of Tb,"
Staff Paper Series
11654, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
Handle:
RePEc:ags:midasp:11654
DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.11654
Download full text from publisher
Citations
Citations are extracted by the
CitEc Project, subscribe to its
RSS feed for this item.
Cited by:
- Pritchett, James G. & Thilmany, Dawn D. & Johnson, Kamina K., 2005.
"Animal Disease Economic Impacts: A Survey of Literature and Typology of Research Approaches,"
International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 8(1), pages 1-23.
- Wolf, Christopher A., 2005.
"Producer Livestock Disease Management Incentives and Decisions,"
International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 8(1), pages 1-16.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:midasp:11654. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/damsuus.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.