For the last several weeks, the cattle industry has found itself watching Washington with one eye on the market and the other on the White House.
On Aug. 21, President Donald Trump announced plans to allow additional lower-tariff beef imports to bring relief to consumers facing record-high beef prices. Five days later, the administration made that move official, expanding the tariff-rate quota by 300,000 metric tons of lean beef trimmings over a 90-day period.
The reaction from cattle country was immediate.
Cattle markets turned sharply lower, producer groups pushed back, and questions surfaced about what increased imports might mean at a time when the U.S. cattle herd sits near a 75-year low. The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, American Farm Bureau Federation, Livestock Marketing Association and U.S. Cattlemen’s Association all urged the administration to reconsider the move. For once, I was encouraged to see major membership organizations come together around a unified concern.
Then, almost as quickly, the conversation changed.
On Sept. 4, Trump met with a small group of ranchers and independent industry voices at the White House and signed executive orders aimed at supporting the domestic cattle business. Those orders addressed wolf management, Packers and Stockyards Act enforcement, opportunities for smaller and regional processors, interstate meat sales, country-of-origin labeling and a broader review of federal policies affecting ranchers.
Many of those are issues cattlemen have asked Washington to address for years. And that is where this becomes difficult to understand.
There are parts of the administration’s recent actions that deserve credit. Ranchers across the West understand firsthand the challenges surrounding predators, federal grazing policy and limited processing options. Greater competition in meatpacking, stronger opportunities for regional processors and a serious discussion about labeling American beef are all conversations worth having.
But cattle producers are also being asked to rebuild a national cow herd that did not disappear overnight and will not return overnight.
That takes confidence.
A rancher retaining heifers today is making a decision that may not pay for years. He is betting on grass, feed, weather, interest rates, labor and cattle markets long into the future. A young producer buying cows at today’s prices is putting tremendous capital at risk. A family deciding whether to expand is not making that choice based on next Tuesday’s market. They are making a multi-year commitment.
That is why government intervention designed to soften beef prices sends such a powerful message back through the cattle chain.
Consumers absolutely matter. We need beef to remain something American families can afford to put on the table. No cattle producer should celebrate a retail price that eventually drives customers away from our product. Yet beef demand remains historically strong. The more we tell consumers beef is “too high,” the more we risk convincing them it is—even while they continue to show us they value the product.
But the cattle business is not a factory where somebody in Washington can simply turn up production when prices get high.
You cannot manufacture another calf crop in 90 days.
You cannot rebuild the cow herd with a press release.
And you cannot encourage producers to expand while simultaneously creating uncertainty about whether government will step into the market when prices become politically uncomfortable.
That is what the last few weeks have felt like from cattle country: a game of cat and mouse.
One day the message is that beef prices are too high and imports need to increase. A few days later, a small group of ranchers—several with large social media followings—are standing in the White House while the administration announces plans to strengthen the American cattle industry. We talk about rebuilding the domestic herd, then introduce policies cattlemen fear could weaken the very market signals encouraging that rebuilding.
It feels less like a straight road and more like a political roundabout—with everyone entering from a different direction and nobody quite sure which exit we are supposed to take.
I truly believe the intention to help is real. But helping the cattle industry requires understanding how slowly this business moves, how much capital producers have at risk and how deeply confidence matters.
Cattlemen do not need Washington to manage every turn of the market.
We need consistency. We need competition. We need access to land. We need consumers who trust and value American beef. Most of all, if we are serious about rebuilding the American cattle herd, producers need enough confidence to do what cattlemen have always done best: make long-term decisions, take the risk and raise the cattle. — JARED PATTERSON
