IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jagaec/v14y1982i01p105-108_02.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Homogeneity of Grade Classifications Under the New and Old Feeder Cattle Grading Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Trapp, James N.

Abstract

In 1979, the USDA implemented a new feeder cattle grading system that is distinctly different from the old, both in concept and terminology. Under the old grading system, the traditional grade categories of Prime, Choice, Good, and so on were used. Animals were graded according to their ability to satisfy a number of qualitative characteristics. The new system is based upon a dual criterion of framesize and muscling. Cattle are graded as either having large, medium, or small framesizes and No. 1, No. 2, or No. 3 muscling (thickness).Casual observation of the two grading systems indicates that cattle graded as Choice under the old system will in most cases be classified as Medium Frame, No. 1 Muscled cattle under the new system. Likewise, cattle previously graded as Good will in most cases likely be graded as Medium Frame, No. 2 Muscled animals.

Suggested Citation

  • Trapp, James N., 1982. "Economic Homogeneity of Grade Classifications Under the New and Old Feeder Cattle Grading Systems," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 105-108, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jagaec:v:14:y:1982:i:01:p:105-108_02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0081305200027643/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cup:jagaec:v:14:y:1982:i:01:p:105-108_02. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/aae .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.