By Donnell Brown, Texas & Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association director and chair of the marketing and transportation committee
A pound is a pound — at least on the scale. But a pound of gold is worth far more than a pound of lead. The same principle applies to beef. Every pound adds weight to a carcass, but not every pound creates the same value.
For generations, America’s cattle ranchers have answered the call to produce higher-quality beef. We’ve improved genetics, adopted better management practices and continually found ways to produce more with less. Consumers have rewarded our steady improvement in beef quality, especially increased marbling that delivers greater flavor, juiciness and eating satisfaction.
That’s why U.S. beef remains the gold standard around the world.
With fewer cattle available today and beef demand remaining strong, the market has encouraged cattle feeders to add more weight to each animal. Cattle are being fed longer to produce heavier carcasses with more marbling. That strategy has helped maintain beef production and increase the amount of Prime beef available to consumers. But it also presents an important economic question: Are all those additional pounds equally valuable?
Additional days on feed can improve marbling, but they also add significantly more seam and internal fat. That fat still has value, particularly in ground beef production, but it does not carry the same value as highly marbled beef. The final pounds added to a finished animal are usually the most expensive pounds to produce. They require additional feed, water, labor, yardage and time. As cattle become heavier and fatter, an increasing portion of those additional pounds are waste fat rather than saleable muscle.
Current market conditions justify those extra days now, but markets are dynamic and cyclical. Feed costs will rise. Beef prices will eventually adjust when cattle supplies rebuild. When that happens, the industry will once again place greater emphasis on feed efficiency, and less expensive cost of gain.
The question is not whether we can produce Prime beef under today’s conditions, but whether we can continue producing abundant Prime beef when the economics no longer support feeding cattle for as many days. That’s when genetics and accurate value signals are a necessity.
The current USDA Yield Grade system was developed more than 60 years ago. Since then, finished cattle have almost doubled in weight. Additionally, we have better technology to more accurately estimate red meat yield. As a result, today’s grading system does not accurately reflect the true value of cattle going through processing facilities. Now, USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service is asking whether U.S. Standards for Grades of Carcass Beef still reflect what today’s consumers want and what today’s producers are delivering.
This conversation is about much more than carcass grades. It’s about making sure ranchers are paid accurately for the pounds of red meat they produce.
A modern grading system should more accurately distinguish between pounds of muscle and pounds of excess fat. It should recognize cattle that produce a higher percentage of valuable red meat — not simply cattle that produce heavier carcasses. This matters because ranchers respond to market incentives.
Improving efficiency isn’t about producing less beef or sacrificing quality. It’s about producing more pounds of highly marbled, quality beef while using fewer resources. As a result, ranchers lower their production costs and improve profitability. Packers process more saleable product with less excess fat. Consumers receive the premium eating experience they demand, while confidence in beef remains strong.
Ultimately, our industry strengthens its long-term sustainability by making better use of the natural resources entrusted to us.
That is why Texas & Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association is actively engaged in USDA’s review of the U.S. Standards for Grades of Carcass Beef. We support evaluating modern value differentiation metrics that better recognize differences in carcass value beyond the traditional Choice-Select spread, while maintaining the industry’s commitment to exceptional beef quality. This could look like the industry incorporating reporting on the Prime-Choice spread in addition to the Choice-Select spread.
This is not about producing less beef. It is about producing more of the beef consumers value most. It is not about sacrificing quality for efficiency. It is about using genetics, technology and better market signals to achieve both.
The objective is not to abandon the grading system that helped make American beef successful. It is to ensure the grading system rewards what truly creates value today — cattle that efficiently produce abundant, highly marbled great-tasting beef with a high percentage of saleable red meat.
As ranchers, we constantly adapt to changing conditions because that’s how we remain competitive. Our grading and marketing systems should be designed to do the same. If the system no longer reflects the value we create, then it’s time to fix it.
###