The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1916-12-11
Ry Il. p. BURTON.

By II. p. BURTON.
Chicago, Dec. 11.-One obvious fact
soon emerges from the clouding mass
of detail that intrigues any impartial
study of the problem of how the Unit
ed States is to get cheaper meat, and
that is this:
That we must produce more ami.
mails from which this meat is to be
derived. For as statement of plain
fact, it should be understood at once
that while we have been increasing
in population, the number of cattle
we raise has been dwindling-exact-
ly the reverse of what should have
been happening.
supply Compared.
In 1896 we had 100000 beef cat.
tie.
In 1907 we had 100000 beef cat
tie.
In 1915 we had S7,Ooo,O0o beef cat
tie, .s.
These figures represent strategic
points in the curve OF our cattle pro:
,duction, which exhibits steady rise
from 1896 to 1907, and from then on
betrays what amounts to steady low
ering, although during this entire Pc
riod our population has been growing
by leaps and bounds. The "sheep
curve"is likewise unto it: .''
In 1896 we had 3S,000,000 sheep.
. In 1910 we had 57,0OO,O00 sheep.
In 1915 we had 49;000,0O0 sheep.
Shrinkage.
This illustrates the same tendency
to shrinkage in production OF sheep
as is shown in the instance of cattle;
in the case of swine alone an upward
trend is visible. the number of swine
that were available in 1896 being A..
OOO, 900 and the number in 1915 hav-
ing risen to 64 millions. (But it is to
be remembered that swine take only
eight months to mature for market
and are therefore more easily sub
jected to current economic conditions.
An ample confidence in the future
must enter largely in to the business
equipment of the producer of the
more slowly maturing beef and
sheep; else he will probably see fit to
narrow his scale of production until
it comes practically to point OF futil-
ity.
The serious shrinkage in the num-
bers of major animals is further
shown in an official government ami
NAL census:
Big Decline.
On January l, 1907, the number OF
cattle and milch cows on United
States farms was 72,533,996.
On January l, 1912, the number had
declined to 57,959,O0O.
This represents a loss of 100000
or twenty per cent in five years!
"And while this loss was taking
place. declares the bulletin, ut must
be borne in mind that in the last ten
years the population has increased by
Is 900, ,O0O-a gain of 21 per cent. In
other words, two cattle were lost in
those ten years for every man, wo-
man and child gained!
What are the causes of the falling
off in the production of cattle when
practically every other business in
the United States seems to be grow
ing at rate unsurpassed in the
worlds history?
This question is leading, and brings
us at once to the very bottom, to the
foundation, of the pyramid that. sup
ports the business of the great meat
packers of the United States-the
Swifts, Armours, Morrises and Cuda-
hys- who pile up their millions OF
dollars every year from the business
of killing and dressing meats for the
people of this and other countries.
These men, the ones who make pos
sible the packers businesses, include
two great groups of growers, the
s'breeders' and feeders of cattle,
sheep and hogs. About them the
whole pulse of western life beats. and
without them the red current of the
business life of the plains would be
greatly stagnated, if not nearly still
ed: a condition which certainly would
be widely reflected, too, in our cen
ters of commerce since it would affect
very deeply our vast trade in grams
hides and wool as well as in meats
themselves and various other import
ant commodities.
Now toward the falling off of pro-
duction in this most important OF all
our industries, and the consequent
great rise in meat prices, what part
do these breeders and feeders play?
Are they responsible in any way.
primarily, for soaring costs, or are
(Continued on page 49,