Source: NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV submitted to
BEEF SYSTEMS CENTER OF EXCELLENCE
Sponsoring Institution
State Agricultural Experiment Station
Project Status
TERMINATED
Funding Source
Reporting Frequency
Annual
Accession No.
0200256
Grant No.
(N/A)
Project No.
ND03741
Proposal No.
(N/A)
Multistate No.
(N/A)
Program Code
(N/A)
Project Start Date
Mar 1, 2004
Project End Date
Sep 30, 2009
Grant Year
(N/A)
Project Director
Lardy, G.
Recipient Organization
NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV
(N/A)
FARGO,ND 58105
Performing Department
ANIMAL SCIENCES
Non Technical Summary
Several hurdles to small-scale meat processing in the Upper Midwest exist. These include opportunities for benchmarking, offal markets, and product markets and business planning. Our overall objective is to investigate barriers to development of beef processing businesses and to provide data to new and existing meat processing businesses.
Animal Health Component
45%
Research Effort Categories
Basic
25%
Applied
45%
Developmental
30%
Classification

Knowledge Area (KA)Subject of Investigation (SOI)Field of Science (FOS)Percent
3073310106010%
3083310106010%
3083320106010%
5013320106010%
5013320301020%
5013330106010%
5013330301010%
5113330106010%
7123320110010%
Goals / Objectives
The objectives of the Beef Systems Center of Excellence are: 1) Create a model for development of an integrated meat processing industry that could be implemented in other parts of the state, region, or country. 2) Enhance NDSU's ability to provide leading research in the following areas: a) effects of genetics, management, and nutrition regimens on carcass merit, quality, and sensory characteristics, b) food safety and nutritional qualities of resulting beef products, c) new and emerging technologies in slaughter, fabrication, further processing, and value-added beef products, d) beef and beef marketing. 3) Provide hands-on training, classroom education, and outreach opportunities in slaughter, meat processing, food safety, and further processing. This project will improve the ability of beef producers in the Upper Midwest to sell and market their beef, capture data on their cattle, and increase the value of their cattle due to improved genetics and management to achieve product specifications.
Project Methods
Several hurdles to small-scale meat processing in the Upper Midwest exist and are detailed below. Our overall objective is to investigate these hurdles and to provide data to new and existing meat processing businesses. 1. Development of Reliable Data on Processing Efficiencies and Opportunity for Benchmarking. Little data exists on processing efficiencies for small-scale meat processors. For example, business plans routinely need to include data on the number of employees, labor costs, equipment costs, and facility costs. However, there is little data for start up businesses to use in development of these costs. Small meat processing facilities in the region also have no access to benchmarking services that would allow them to compare operating efficiencies and performance to similar operations. Benchmarking is used by other industries and businesses as a means to compare efficiencies, set goals, and improve profitability. Data gathered in our model plant would be used to provide benchmarking services to other small plants in the region. 2. Garnering Value from Offal. One significant hurdle related to smaller processing plants is effective utilization of non-carcass products such as hides, organ meats, and inedible offal. Larger plants are able to capture advantages of economies of scale. Currently, many small processors in the region either pay for rendering services or pay tipping charges to landfill offal products. This represents a large disincentive for smaller processing plants. This project will study various methods for small processors to capture value from inedible offal products. 3. Identifying Market Opportunities. Another hurdle faced by many small processors in the region is identification of market opportunities or the lack of market definition by the business itself. One of the purposes of the Beef Systems Center of Excellence is to study potential markets and assist other businesses in market development, market planning, and market access. For example, the Beef Systems Center of Excellence has had preliminary discussions with Certified Angus Beef as a potential market partner. Additional work on marketing could include development of marketing guidelines and market identification assistance. 4. Development of Best Management Practices for Small Plants. Currently, no set of Best Management Practices (BMP's) exists for small processing plants. Texas A&M University has recently prepared a BMP guide aimed primarily at medium and large processors (1,000 head per day or more). These guidelines may not fit many small processors, either due to implementation costs, logistical feasibility, facility constraints, or other factors unique to small operations. The above-mentioned factors will be investigated extensively by the investigators involved in developing the NDSU Beef Systems Center of Excellence. Detailed reports will be prepared as part of the effort.

Progress 03/01/04 to 09/30/09

Outputs
OUTPUTS: Several outputs were achieved over the course of this project. Most importantly the NDSU Beef Systems Center was developed, a private beef processing partner was found (ND Natural Beef), and beef processing facility was built. Resulting from the formation of the Beef Systems Center are many research, teaching, and Extension activities. The business plan of North Dakota Natural Beef, LLC calls for the harvesting of 25,000 head of cattle in year five. This will not only grow substantially the number of cattle processed in the state, but will stimulate additional cattle feeding in the state. In addition, the business and facility were used by 3 different Animal Science classes, several Extension activities took place at the center, and data was collected for 3 different research projects. Moreover, student internships were offered at ND Natural Beef. Research outputs include a study conducted to evaluate the effects of rate of gain during the backgrounding period (prior to finishing) on subsequent feedlot performance, carcass characteristics, and consumer sensory characteristics of resulting beef products. Results were disseminated at local extension meetings and at the Midwest Animal Science meetings through the presentation of an abstract. This meeting is held annually in Des Moines, IA and attracts over 1,000 scientists, industry professionals, and extension personnel from 10 midwest states as well as foreign countries. Data was also presented at one producer field day in Hettinger, ND. About 50 beef cattle producers, extension agents, and allied industry personnel attended the meeting. Results were also made available to interested parties through publication in beef cattle research reports. This annual report is mailed to over 300 beef cattle producers and made available publically through the internet. A presentation at the Hettinger Research Center Sheep and Beef Field Day was presented. Additional studies include data were collected from three auction markets: Napoleon Livestock, Napoleon; Kist Livestock, Mandan; and Stockmen's Livestock, Dickinson, during three consecutive weeks in late October and November 2005, when most calves sold were freshly weaned. Data again were collected from the same auction markets for three consecutive weeks in January 2006. North Dakota State University representatives were present at the sales and collected the following for each lot of calves sold: 1) lot number, 2) lot size, 3) sex, 4) weight, 5) hair color, and 6) vaccinations and deworming products. ZIP codes of destinations of calves were determined from market clearance records from each auction market. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals G.P. Lardy - PI R.J. Maddock - CoPI Collaborators K.L. Haadem, K.R. Maddock-Carlin, W.W. Dvorak, K.J. Froelich, J.R. Kramlich, G.L. Payne, M. Thompson, I. Rush, S. Quinn, C. Shauer, L.K. Hansen-Lardy and K.G. Odde Training/Professional Development J.L. Leupp, B.A. Loken - Graduate Students Partners North Dakota Stockmen's Association, Stockmens Livestock Exchange, Napoleon Livestock, Kist Livestock, Partner Organizations North Dakota Natural Beef LLC TARGET AUDIENCES: Beef cattle producers, veterinarians, meat processing personnel, allied industry personnel. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Not relevant to this project.

Impacts
Research Findings: Steers fed the HIGH GAIN diet had increased ADG (1.67 vs. 1.40 kg/d; P < 0.001) compared to steers fed LOW GAIN diet. Dry matter intake was greater (9.49 vs. 8.35 kg; P < 0.001) for steers fed the HIGH GAIN vs. LOW GAIN diet. Total backgrounding cost ($/hd) was lower (P < 0.001) for those steers fed LOW GAIN diet compared to HIGH GAIN diet ($126.00 vs $140.35, respectively); however, total cost per kg of gain was not different (P = 0.24; $0.485/kg gain). Following the backgrounding period, steers were fed a common finishing diet for 135 d. During the finishing period, LOW GAIN steers tended to have greater (10.73 vs. 10.35 kg; P = 0.12) DMI compared with those fed HIGH GAIN diets; however, ADG was not different (1.55 kg; P = 0.72) among treatments. Hot carcass weight, marbling score, 12th rib fat, LM area, and USDA yield grade were not different (P > 0.12) between treatments and averaged 363 kg, Sm30, 1.33 cm, 83.8 cm2 , and 2.7, respectively. There were no differences (P = 0.77; 3.63 +/- 0.12 kg) in Warner-Bratzler shear force tenderness of rib-eye steaks. Percent cooking loss was increased in LOW GAIN diets (P = 0.017). No differences were observed in consumer sensory analysis of tenderness, juiciness, and flavor intensity (P &#8805; 0.276; 5.43 +/- 0.12, 5.07 +/- 0.13, and 5.17 +/- 0.05, respectively). These data suggest that feeding steers diets which differ in energy concentration and result in gains between 1.4 and 1.7 kg/d during the growing period results in slight changes in subsequent finishing performance but does not affect meat quality. Research Findings: Steers fed the HIGH GAIN diet had increased ADG (1.67 vs. 1.40 kg/d; P < 0.001) compared to steers fed LOW GAIN diet. Dry matter intake was greater (9.49 vs. 8.35 kg; P < 0.001) for steers fed the HIGH GAIN vs. LOW GAIN diet. Total backgrounding cost ($/hd) was lower (P < 0.001) for those steers fed LOW GAIN diet compared to HIGH GAIN diet ($126.00 vs $140.35, respectively); however, total cost per kg of gain was not different (P = 0.24; $0.485/kg gain). Following the backgrounding period, steers were fed a common finishing diet for 135 d. During the finishing period, LOW GAIN steers tended to have greater (10.73 vs. 10.35 kg; P = 0.12) DMI compared with those fed HIGH GAIN diets; however, ADG was not different (1.55 kg; P = 0.72) among treatments. Hot carcass weight, marbling score, 12th rib fat, LM area, and USDA yield grade were not different (P > 0.12) between treatments and averaged 363 kg, Sm30, 1.33 cm, 83.8 cm2 , and 2.7, respectively. There were no differences (P = 0.77; 3.63 +/- 0.12 kg) in Warner-Bratzler shear force tenderness of rib-eye steaks. Percent cooking loss was increased in LOW GAIN diets (P = 0.017). No differences were observed in consumer sensory analysis of tenderness, juiciness, and flavor intensity (P &#8805; 0.276; 5.43 +/- 0.12, 5.07 +/- 0.13, and 5.17 +/- 0.05, respectively). These data suggest that feeding steers diets which differ in energy concentration and result in gains between 1.4 and 1.7 kg/d during the growing period results in slight changes in subsequent finishing performance but does not affect meat quality.

Publications

  • Rime, T., G. Lardy, K. Maddock-Carlin, K. Odde and W. Eide. 2006. Survey of cattle backgrounding and finishing feedlots in North Dakota. NDSU Beef Feedlot Research Report, volume 29, p. 48.
  • Rime, T.G., K.R. Maddock-Carlin, W.D. Eide, G.P. Lardy and K.G. Odde. 2006. Survey of cattle backgrounding and finishing feedlots in North Dakota. J. Anim. Sci. 84:107 (Suppl. 2).
  • Leupp, J.L., G.P. Lardy, K.L. Haadem, K.R. Maddock-Carlin, W.W. Dvorak, K.J. Froelich, J.R. Kramlich, G.L. Payne and K.G. Odde. 2006. Where do North Dakota Feeder Calves go once they have been marketed NDSU Beef Feedlot Research Report, volume 29, p. 46.
  • Rime, T.G., K.R. Maddock-Carlin, W.D. Eide, T.D. Maddock, P.T. Berg, M.J. Marchello, G.P. Lardy and K.G. Odde. 2006. Survey of small meat processors in North Dakota. J. Anim. Sci. 84:107 (Suppl. 2).
  • Odde, K.G. 2006. Beef Quality Assurance: Background, Analysis and Recommendations for the Future. Joint Advisory Committee, National Cattlemens Beef Association, July 10-11, Reno, NV, http://www.beefboard.org/uDocs/beefqualityassurance-threewhitepapers 2 .pdf.
  • J. L. Leupp, G. P. Lardy, K. L. Haadem, K. R. Maddock-Carlin, W. W. Dvorak, K. J. Froelich, J. R. Kramlich, G. L. Payne, L. K. Hansen-Lardy, and K. G. Odde. 2007. Factors influencing price of North Dakota feeder calves. J. Anim. Sci. 85 (Suppl. 2) 53.
  • J. L. Leupp, G. P. Lardy, K. L. Haadem, K. R. Maddock-Carlin, W. W. Dvorak, K. J. Froelich, J. R. Kramlich, G. L. Payne, L. K. Hansen-Lardy and K. G. Odde. 2007. Factors influencing sale price of North Dakota calves. NDSU Agric. Exp. Sta. Beef Cattle and Range Research Report. pp. 36-39


Progress 10/01/07 to 09/30/08

Outputs
OUTPUTS: A study was conducted to evaluate the effects of rate of gain during the backgrounding period (prior to finishing) on subsequent feedlot performance, carcass characteristics, and consumer sensory characteristics of resulting beef products. Results were disseminated at local extension meetings and at the Midwest Animal Science meetings through the presentation of an abstract. This meeting is held annually in Des Moines, IA and attracts over 1,000 scientists, industry professionals, and extension personnel from 10 midwest states as well as foreign countries. Data was also presented at one producer field day in Hettinger, ND. About 50 beef cattle producers, extension agents, and allied industry personnel attended the meeting. Results were also made available to interested parties through publication in beef cattle research reports. This annual report is mailed to over 300 beef cattle producers and made available publically through the internet. PARTICIPANTS: Beth Loken-Graduate Student Rob Maddock-Co PI Greg Lardy-Co PI Michele Thompson-Collaborator Chris Schauer-Collaborator Ivan Rush-Collaborator Stephanie Quinn-Collaborator Partner Organizations North Dakota Natural Beef LLC A presentation at the Hettinger Research Center Sheep and Beef Field Day was presented. TARGET AUDIENCES: Beef cattle produers, veterinarians, meat processing personnel, allied industry personnel. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.

Impacts
Research Findings: Steers fed the HIGH GAIN diet had increased ADG (1.67 vs. 1.40 kg/d; P < 0.001) compared to steers fed LOW GAIN diet. Dry matter intake was greater (9.49 vs. 8.35 kg; P < 0.001) for steers fed the HIGH GAIN vs. LOW GAIN diet. Total backgrounding cost ($/hd) was lower (P < 0.001) for those steers fed LOW GAIN diet compared to HIGH GAIN diet ($126.00 vs $140.35, respectively); however, total cost per kg of gain was not different (P = 0.24; $0.485/kg gain). Following the backgrounding period, steers were fed a common finishing diet for 135 d. During the finishing period, LOW GAIN steers tended to have greater (10.73 vs. 10.35 kg; P = 0.12) DMI compared with those fed HIGH GAIN diets; however, ADG was not different (1.55 kg; P = 0.72) among treatments. Hot carcass weight, marbling score, 12th rib fat, LM area, and USDA yield grade were not different (P > 0.12) between treatments and averaged 363 kg, Sm30, 1.33 cm, 83.8 cm2 , and 2.7, respectively. There were no differences (P = 0.77; 3.63 +/- 0.12 kg) in Warner-Bratzler shear force tenderness of rib-eye steaks. Percent cooking loss was increased in LOW GAIN diets (P = 0.017). No differences were observed in consumer sensory analysis of tenderness, juiciness, and flavor intensity (P &#8805; 0.276; 5.43 +/- 0.12, 5.07 +/- 0.13, and 5.17 +/- 0.05, respectively). These data suggest that feeding steers diets which differ in energy concentration and result in gains between 1.4 and 1.7 kg/d during the growing period results in slight changes in subsequent finishing performance but does not affect meat quality.

Publications

  • B. A. Stoltenow, G. P. Lardy, M. M. Stamm, and R. J. Maddock. 2008. Impact of growing rate of gain on subsequent feedlot performance, carcass characteristics, and Warner Bratzler shear force. J. Anim. Sci. 86 (E Suppl. 3):55.
  • B. Loken, R. Maddock, M.M. Stamm and G.P. Lardy. 2008. Effect of backgrounding rate of gain on subsequent feedlot performance, carcass characteristics, Warner Bratzler shear force and sensory analysis. Pp. 35-37. NDSU Agric. Exp. Stn. Beef Cattle and Range Research Report. http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/livestock/2007 beef report.pdf


Progress 10/01/06 to 09/30/07

Outputs
OUTPUTS: Data were collected from three auction markets: Napoleon Livestock, Napoleon; Kist Livestock, Mandan; and Stockmen's Livestock, Dickinson, during three consecutive weeks in late October and November 2005, when most calves sold were freshly weaned. Data again were collected from the same auction markets for three consecutive weeks in January 2006. North Dakota State University representatives were present at the sales and collected the following for each lot of calves sold: 1) lot number, 2) lot size, 3) sex, 4) weight, 5) hair color, and 6) vaccinations and deworming products. ZIP codes of destinations of calves were determined from market clearance records from each auction market. PARTICIPANTS: J.L. Leupp, G.P. Lardy, K.L. Haadem, K.R. Maddock-Carlin, W.W. Dvorak, K.J. Froelich, J.R. Kramlich, G.L. Payne, L.K. Hansen-Lardy and K.G. Odde. Partner Organizations: North Dakota Stockmen's Association, Stockmens Livestock Exchange, Napoleon Livestock, Kist Livestock. TARGET AUDIENCES: North Dakota ranchers, cow calf producers, order buyers, and sale barn operators. Other influencers include veterinarians and allied industry personnel. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: The project has been expanded to include Montana, South Dakota, and Wyoming for the upcoming year.

Impacts
Our objective was to determine factors influencing sale price of calves and destination of feeder calves from North Dakota (ND) auction markets. Data were collected at three auction markets in ND in late October and November, 2005 (31,312 calves; avg wt = 244 +/-118 kg; three sales per market) and again in January, 2006 (JAN; 29,907 calves; avg wt = 285 +/- 137 kg; three sales per market). The following data were collected for each lot of calves sold: sex, weight, breed description, health program, vaccinations, deworming products, implant status, natural qualified, and beef quality assurance certification. Destination of calves was determined from brand inspection records. In the fall, calves sold in larger lot sizes (greater than 21 head) received greater (P < 0.0001) prices when compared with those sold in smaller lot sizes. Price for steer calves was $0.18/kg greater (P < 0.0001) than heifer calves. Price for black-hided cattle was $0.02/kg greater than (P = 0.04) Charolais-cross cattle. Charolais-cross cattle averaged $2.84/kg, which was greater (P = 0.05) than the average price received for red-hided cattle ($2.80/kg). Price for red-hided cattle was $0.02/kg greater than mixed colored cattle. Vaccinations (7-way clostridial, 4-way viral, and Pasteurella) increased (P < 0.0001) price received for calves sold in the fall compared with no vaccinations. In JAN, price for calves sold in lot sizes of &#8804; 5 was lower (P < 0.0001; $2.63/kg) compared with the other lot sizes (&#8805; 6). Price for steer calves was $0.06/kg greater than heifer calves. Price for black-hided and Charolais-cross cattle was greater (P &#8804; 0.01) than mixed and red-hided cattle. Vaccinations (7-way clostridial, 4-way viral, and Pasteurella) tended to increase (P = 0.06) sale price compared with no vaccinations. Non-implanted calves averaged $0.03/kg greater than implanted calves. Calves sold in the fall were shipped to 11 states with most remaining in ND (46%) while 41% remained in ND following JAN sales. These data suggest that feeder calf price is dependent on multiple factors. Selling calves in larger lot sizes and with vaccinations brought higher prices in ND auction markets.

Publications

  • J. L. Leupp, G. P. Lardy, K. L. Haadem, K. R. Maddock-Carlin, W. W. Dvorak, K. J. Froelich, J. R. Kramlich, G. L. Payne, L. K. Hansen-Lardy, and K. G. Odde. 2007. Factors influencing price of North Dakota feeder calves. J. Anim. Sci. 85 (Suppl. 2) 53.
  • J. L. Leupp, G. P. Lardy, K. L. Haadem, K. R. Maddock-Carlin, W. W. Dvorak, K. J. Froelich, J. R. Kramlich, G. L. Payne, L. K. Hansen-Lardy and K. G. Odde. 2007. Factors influencing sale price of North Dakota calves. NDSU Agric. Exp. Sta. Beef Cattle and Range Research Report. pp. 36-39


Progress 10/01/05 to 09/30/06

Outputs
Significant progress was made towards the objectives of the creation of a model for an integrated meat industry in North Dakota, enhancing NDSU's ability to conduct leading research, and providing education to students, producers and small meat processors. A new private company, North Dakota Natural Beef, LLC was created and capitalized with an equity drive that raised $3,700,000. This is a partnership with the North American Bison Cooperative located in New Rockford, ND. North Dakota Natural Beef, LLC is the private partner of the NDSU Beef Systems Center of Excellence. North Dakota Natural Beef, LLC has acquired a facility near the NDSU campus that will be renovated and built on to for fabrication, further processing and distribution of product. NDSU will lease approximately 6,000 square feet of space in the facility for the research and teaching program. Three meat scientists were hired which will help fulfill the research and education objectives of the Center.

Impacts
The business plan of North Dakota Natural Beef, LLC calls for the harvesting of 25,000 head of cattle in year five. This will not only grow substantially the number of cattle processed in the state, but will stimulate additional cattle feeding in the state.

Publications

  • Rime, T., G. Lardy, K. Maddock-Carlin, K. Odde and W. Eide. 2006. Survey of cattle backgrounding and finishing feedlots in North Dakota. NDSU Beef Feedlot Research Report, volume 29, p. 48.
  • Rime, T.G., K.R. Maddock-Carlin, W.D. Eide, G.P. Lardy and K.G. Odde. 2006. Survey of cattle backgrounding and finishing feedlots in North Dakota. J. Anim. Sci. 84:107 (Suppl. 2).
  • Leupp, J.L., G.P. Lardy, K.L. Haadem, K.R. Maddock-Carlin, W.W. Dvorak, K.J. Froelich, J.R. Kramlich, G.L. Payne and K.G. Odde. 2006. Where do North Dakota Feeder Calves go once they have been marketed? NDSU Beef Feedlot Research Report, volume 29, p. 46.
  • Rime, T.G., K.R. Maddock-Carlin, W.D. Eide, T.D. Maddock, P.T. Berg, M.J. Marchello, G.P. Lardy and K.G. Odde. 2006. Survey of small meat processors in North Dakota. J. Anim. Sci. 84:107 (Suppl. 2).
  • Odde, K.G. 2006. Beef Quality Assurance: Background, Analysis and Recommendations for the Future. Joint Advisory Committee, National Cattlemens Beef Association, July 10-11, Reno, NV, http://www.beefboard.org/uDocs/beefqualityassurance-threewhitepapers_ 2_.pdf.


Progress 10/01/04 to 09/30/05

Outputs
Two surveys were conducted. The first was used to evaluate North Dakota's current supply of fed cattle and potential to supply additional fed cattle, a survey was administered to 148 beef cattle backgrounders and finishers in North Dakota with an estimated one time capacity > 500 hd. A total of 130 respondents completed the survey. North Dakota had 99,385 cattle on feed in spring of 2005 with 240,420 head fed annually. Total feedlot capacity was 188,693 head with an average capacity of 1,452 head and an average inventory of 771 head. The majority of the cattle were backgrounded (65%), while only 37 percent of the cattle were finished. The majority of cattle being fed in ND were Angus-based (59%). Forty-seven percent of operators did not use growth implants. Cattle in ND were marketed primarily through local auctions (26%) and contracts with slaughter plants (32%). Sixty seven percent of slaughter cattle were sold on a live basis and 24 percent were marketed on a grid. Feed inputs were mainly produced on the farm or ranch (78%), whereas only 2 percent of feed was purchased and processed commercially. Corn was the main concentrate feed (47%) and silage was the main forage (40%). Operators reported 54 percent of cattle were custom fed, of which 92 percent were fed using yardage and feed arrangements. The majority of operators (59%) indicated an interest in expanding their feedlots. Implementation of a 'natural beef' program was of interest to 58 percent of operators. However, respondents indicated a 14 percent increase in price would be required to raise 'natural beef'. The second survey was used to determine offal production in North Dakota. The survey addressed four topics: 1) amounts and types of offal produced; 2) geographic distribution of offal; 3) seasonal trends of production; and 4) current methods of offal disposal. A total of 117 plants were contacted and personally visited. The total offal production in North Dakota was 16,240,428 kg annually. Processing plants in North Dakota produced 5,233,818 kg of beef offal from 21,603 head; 608,716 kg of hog offal from 11,645 head; 12,588 kg lamb offal from 454 head; 545,580 kg of bison offal from 2,598 head; 623,159 kg of deer and elk offal from 26,231 head; and 406,405 kg of boxed beef offal. The southeast region of North Dakota produced the greatest amount of offal (2,272,277 kg), followed by the southwest (1,937,285 kg), northwest (1,821,714 kg), and northeast (1,398,989 kg). Seasonal production of renderable offal varied slightly as 23.4 percent of total offal is produced in both quarters 2 and 3 and 28.1 percent is produced in quarter 4. Offal in North Dakota was disposed of in three ways: 1) rendered; 2) deposited in a municipal landfill; 3) deposited in a private landfill. Approximately 80% of all offal is rendered. Municipal and private landfills take the remaining balance (11.5 % and 8.5%, respectively). The results of these surveys indicate an interest in increasing feeding capacity in North Dakota and there appears to be insufficient offal production in North Dakota to support a new rendering facility.

Impacts
The results of these surveys indicate an interest in increasing feeding capacity in North Dakota and there appears to be insufficient offal production in North Dakota to support a new rendering facility.

Publications

  • No publications reported this period


Progress 10/01/03 to 09/30/04

Outputs
The objectives of the NDSU Beef Systems Center of Excellence are 1) Create a model for development of an coordinated meat processing industry which could be implemented in other parts of the state, region, or country; 2) Enhance NDSU's ability to provide cutting edge research in the following areas: the effects of genetics, management, and nutrition regimens on carcass merit, quality, and sensory characteristics; food safety and nutrition of resulting meat products; evaluate new and emerging technologies in slaughter, fabrication, further processing, and value added meat products; provide data on meat and meat marketing; and 3) Provide training, educational, and outreach opportunities in slaughter, meat processing, food safety, and further processing. The principle objective of the Center of Excellence in Beef Systems is to provide leadership, scientific and business expertise to develop an integrated meat processing industry in North Dakota. To date we have raised $500,00 in private funds and $1,000,000 in federal funds to match the $800,000 appropriated in the 2003 biennium. We still need to raise an additional $500,000 to meet our match requirements. We continue to look for a business partner. Our main criteria include: 1) a partner who has experience operating small beef cattle packing facilities efficiently and cost effectively, and 2) a partner who has brand equity and an existing label in a major beef market. Our major accomplishments for the past year include completion of a feasibility analysis that indicates there are two major barriers to profitability in small processing facilities. The first is identification of a market for the beef products produced which has potential for market premiums, and the second is garnering value for offal (byproducts). A survey of the state's slaughter facilities indicates most garner little or no value from offal. In fact, many pay to landfill the material at a substantial cost. The center continues to explore ways for smaller processors to add value to byproducts. Our feasibility analysis also indicates a year round supply of fed cattle is critical to the success of any beef cattle slaughter facility. Data gathered by our research team indicates growth in the state's feedlot capacity. There is ample supply of fed cattle in the region to support the scale of facility proposed by the Center.

Impacts
Data collected by our research team will be used to provide more accurate data for businesses, communities, and others interested in developing small scale meat processing businesses. It is clear that the value garnered for offal products in North Dakota plants limits financial performance of those businesses. Further investigation into alternative uses of offal products for small processors seems warranted.

Publications

  • No publications reported this period