||This Month in Ag Connection|
Full Bins - Full Elevators
|How about Bin Rings?
Round bin rings can be conveniently and economically erected inside an existing building to provide emergency grain storage.
Two or three steel rings can be set on an existing floor. Install an unloading auger to the center of the rings for emptying. Anchor the rings as recommended by the manufacturer.
The round shape may leave building corners that are difficult to utilize, but rings can hold more grain with less remodeling. For example, a 40' square pile which is 4' deep at the walls and peaked at 23 degrees holds 8,742 bushels. Round bin rings, 40' diameter and 7'-6" high in the same building with grain peaked at 23 , hold 10,357 bushels.
Tips for Temporary Grain Storage
Hoop structures appear to be most beneficial to producers that satisfy one or more of the following criteria (Midwest Plan Service publication AED 41):
Capital Cost Comparisons
By equitably comparing different types of grow-finish facilities, a swine production operation can determine what style of facility best matches their needs and preferences. A 200-210 head hoop barn costs around $14,000 to construct. Bedding costs run near $4.00/pig and feed efficiencies in well managed facilities are 3.53 pounds of feed per pound of gain in winter and 3.43 in the summer (3.48 average).
A 200 head total slat grow-finish facility costs around $42,000 to construct . Feed efficiencies in well managed buildings average 3.1 pounds of feed per pound of gain.
A summary of facility comparisons in Figure A demonstrates the information needed to determine the style of facility required. From this data and experience gained in Missouri, hoop structures can be constructed at lower capital outlay per pig space/year. However, hoop structures do not allow pigs to convert feed to pounds of pork as efficiently as totally slatted environmentally controlled confinement facilities.
The best performance that can be expected with the hoop barns is comparable to the worst performance in a total slat facility (Figure A). This suggests that total slat facilities that are not managed all-in/all-out and sanitized between groups result in a decreased ADG (average daily gain) and an increased FE (feed efficiency).
A well-managed hoop barn with a strict all-in/all-out protocol may still have some pathogen contamination from previous pigs as a result of dirt floors and wooden walls. The values here represent expected ranges between the two production systems that have been observed in Missouri.
Hoop barns may serve as "tail-ender" facilities in conjunction with total slat facilities. By removing 15% of slower growing pigs and placing them in hoop structures we can increase the number of "turns" that the total slatted barn will allow in a year's time (Figure B). Increasing the number of turns from 2.86 to 3.1 in a total slat barn increases the net return per pig space by $4.85. However, the sort loss associated with this practice will need to be less than $0.71 /cwt ($1.56/head) before the producer will lose additional revenue associated with selling all hogs after 17 weeks of finishing. When the sort loss exceeds $0.71/cwt then a producer may consider an additional 30-day finishing time in the total slat facility.
The sort loss for tail-ender pigs will need to be greater than $1.75 per cwt before the net return per space in a hoop structure w
ill provide additional revenue to the value of the market hog. In this example, one 200-head hoop structure could finish the "tail-enders" from six 600-head total slat confinement facilities.
Hoop structures may allow producers to get into pork production with less capital commitment and less financial risk, but the best net return to the dollars invested in facilities over time will be to those pigs that are raised in well managed total slat grow-finish facilities. However, debt incurred during times when market prices are low will also place highly leveraged units at great risk.
Authors: James Rogers, Livestock Specialist; Thomas J. Fangman DVM, MS; and Joseph Zulovich Ph.D., P.E., Commercial Agriculture Program, UMC
". . . there are another three Cs which are not given enough respect: communication, communication, and communication"
A lender evaluates a borrower for repayment ability, liquidity, solvency, profitability and financial efficiency. These points of financial review dovetail into the traditional five Cs of lending: character, capacity, capital, collateral, and conditions. For existing lines of credit, there are another three Cs which are not given enough respect: communication, communication, and communication.
Well prepared financial statements document and communicate the last four of the five Cs: capacity, capital, collateral, and conditions. However, character is best evidenced by prior actions and performance.
Three basic financial statements should be prepared by every business, for internal use as well as for their creditors, to monitor the financial development of the business: balance sheet, income statement, and cash flow statement.
The income statement is the best tool for analyzing repayment capacity and profitability. The revenues of a business remaining after deducting the operating expenses are the funds available to pay for family living expenses, make new investments, and provide for debt reduction. Income statements prepared with adjustments reflecting change for receivables, inventory and prepayments more accurately reflect the financial results of each year.
The balance sheet provides information for analyzing the liquidity and solvency of the business. One of the best measures of liquidity is the current ratio, which is the current assets divided by the current liabilities. This ratio varies substantially during the production cycle, thus most lenders prefer to have balance sheets prepared on a similar date each year.
The balance sheet also provides information needed to measure the solvency or percent equity of the business. Equity represents the owners investment that is at risk and the greater the percentage of equity, the less the lenders funds are at risk.
The cash flow statement is the third basic component of a financial report. Cash flow statements facilitate the periodic monitoring and comparison of the actual revenues and expenditures to what was budgeted.
Prior year cash flow statements are utilized to more accurately generate a projected cash flow statement. A projected statement identifies periods of anticipated cash shortage and surplus.
A well-prepared financial report (income statement, balance sheet, and cash flow statement) can be one of the most valuable tools of the farm manager for internal decision-making and communication with creditors.
Ag Connection - October 1998
http://outreach.missouri.edu/agconnection/newsletters/is-98-10.htm -- Revised: April 20, 2004