| Increased number animals 1919 over 1918 | 7.3% |
| Decrease in total weight animal purchases | 5.0% |
| Increase in cost of animals | 3.7% |
| Increased price per pound live weight | 1.2¢ |
Probably the fundamental factor in bringing about these conditions, which are distinctly unfavorable from a quality trade standpoint, is the feeder’s expectation of declining prices. This attitude has driven all the animals to market almost as soon as they were in merchantable form. The late winter months of 1919-20 saw an opposite tendency among hog feeders, but this was not sufficiently marked to check the general trend.
Another factor in stimulating this hurried marketing has been the belief that more money could be made by selling the grain crop than by feeding it. This has given short rations to many animals that would have made suitable market records if handled properly, but it has enabled farmers to cash in their grain and meat crops while prices were relatively high.
In terms of permanent agriculture it would have been better to leave a greater share of this cash invested in a further development of livestock, but the war order against feeding wheat placed the situation in some western states beyond the control of the average stockman. As a general practice in production this incomplete utilization of livestock must be deplored, although one cannot criticize the tendency under the special market conditions of 1919 and early 1920.
Financial Aspects of Livestock Industry
ONE of the most significant and gratifying gains in the livestock business during the decade just past is the recognition of its financial soundness. This is reflected in the changed attitude of financiers and investors towards cattle paper. While a decade ago bankers in the great financial centers looked with suspicion upon such securities, now bankers and business men throughout the country purchase approximately $500,000,000 of cattle paper annually and regard it as among the safest investments.
Melvin A. Traylor, President of the First Trust and Savings Bank of Chicago, declares that “loans on livestock are the best of all investments,” and President Thos. P. Martin, of the Oklahoma Stock Yards Bank, Oklahoma City, agrees with him. This latter bank loaned $45,000,000 in seven years to cattle producers in Oklahoma, Texas and New Mexico, only fifty dollars of the amount loaned being lost. It is doubtful if any other industrial securities could make a better or even an equal showing.
There is still some difficulty in arranging loans in some sections of the country, where bankers have not yet realized the changed conditions of the business and farmers have not given the proper emphasis to the improvement of livestock production. But generally speaking the cattle feeder with good judgment in the breeding and selection of feeders meets with no obstacles in financing his operations.