UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Computerized farm management information system for commercial beef ranch operators Sakalauskas, A.J. 1977

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1977_A6_7 S24.pdf [ 15.88MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094100.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094100-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094100-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094100-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094100-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094100-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094100-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094100-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094100.ris

Full Text

A COMPUTERIZED FARM MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR COMMERCIAL BEEF RANCH OPERATORS A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Dept. of A g r i c u l t u r a l Economics) We accept t h i s thesis as - conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA March, 1977 ( c j A. J. Sakalauskas, 1977 by A. J. SAKALAUSKAS In presenting t h i s thesis i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of t h i s thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of the Department or by his representatives. I t i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission. Department of A g r i c u l t u r a l Economics University of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date March 15, 1977 - i -ABSTRACT A COMPUTERIZED FARM MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR COMMERCIAL BEEF RANCH OPERATORS. by A. J. SAKALAUSKAS The objective of the thesis was to develop a computer-ized farm management information system that would a s s i s t ranchers, extension personnel and farm management s p e c i a l i s t s i n t h e i r decision making process. Intensive formal farm planning was made feasible by the use of a multiperiod l i n e a r programming model supplemented by an input form, matrix generator and . report writer software. The model developed represented the structure and production conditions of a beef cow/calf, cow/yearling ranch. It incorporated decision variables representing feeding and livestock a c t i v i t i e s and the cash flows associated with those a c t i v i t i e s . The manage-ment information system was tested on ten cow/calf, cow/ yearling ranches i n the central i n t e r i o r of B r i t i s h Columbia. From the examination of actual test ranches, t h e i r management practices, and t h e i r problems, a hypothetical ranch was formulated. This ranch was used to i l l u s t r a t e the capabil-i t i e s and output of the management information system. The c a p a b i l i t i e s documented were of a descriptive/budgeting, optimization, and research nature. The output consisted of an inventory report, income statement, cash flow summary, balance sheet, f i n a n c i a l measures and r a t i o s , and a l i v e -stock summary. The conclusion was reached that the management information system developed i s a v a l i d d escriptive/predictive t o o l applicable to commercial beef operations. - i i i -TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i v LIST OF TABLES v i i LIST OF FIGURES ix CHAPTER I STATEMENT OF PROBLEM AND OBJECTIVES OF STUDY 1 1.1 Statement of the Problem 2 1.2 Objectives of the Study 5 1.3 Research Procedure 5 1.4 Organization of the Study 7 CHAPTER II THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND CONCEPTS. . 9 2.1 The Dynamic Problem and the Decision Process 10 2.2 Risk and Uncertainty I 4 2.3 Farm Planning Methods Involving Time 16 2.3.1 Multiperiod Linear Programming Models 17 2.3.2 Recursive Linear Programming Models. . 2 2 2.3.3 Non-Analytic Models 24 2.4 Conceptual Framework of the Model Developed . 28 2.5 Review of Operational Management Information Systems 30 CHAPTER III THE EMPIRICAL MODEL . . 36 3.1 Conceptualization Problems and Model Characteristics 36 3.1.1 The Beef Production Cycle 3 6 3.1.2 The Planning Horizon 37 3.1.3 P a r t i a l Optimizations 38 3.1.4 Methods of Dealing With Y i e l d and Price Seasonal V a r i a b i l i t y 39 3.1.5 The Fin a n c i a l Year Versus Crop/ Livestock Production Year 40 3.1.6 Ration Formulae 41 3.2 The Model's Matrix Structure 42 3.2.1 Feed Production Sector 42 3.2.2 Animal Production Sector 4 9 3.2.3 The Fin a n c i a l Sector 51 3.3 The Base Ranch Situation 54 3.4 Detailed Description of Selected Submatrices. 59 3.4.1 Feed Submatrices Description 59 3.4.2 Animal Submatrices Description . . . . 65 - i v -Page 3.4.3 Financial Sub-matrices Description. . . VI 3.4.4 Balance Sheet Items 74 3.5 Discussion of Model Validation 75 CHAPTER IV MODEL APPLICATIONS AND RESULTS. 79 4.1 Results and Analysis of Base Ranch 79 4.1.1 Inventory Report 8 0 4.1.2 Farm Income Statement 8 4 4.1.3 Projected Cash Flow Summary. 39 4.1.4 Statement of Assets, L i a b i l i t i e s and Owner's Equity 9 2 4.1.5 Fin a n c i a l Summary Statement 9 7 4.1.6 Livestock Count 1 0 0 4.2 The Growth Process of the Base Ranch 1 ° 3 4.3 Experimentation With Model Options 1 0 8 4.3.1 Alternative 1: The Feeding Option . . 1 ° 8 4.3.2 Alternative 2: The Livestock Option . 112 4.3.3 Alternative 3: The Optimal Plan . . . I 2 2 4.3.4 Alternative 4: Farm Income Assurance Payments I 2 4 4.4 Summary and Discussion of Alternative Plans . 1 26 CHAPTER V SUMMARY, PRINCIPAL FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1 3 0 5.1 Summary 1 3 0 5.2 P r i n c i p a l Findings and Conclusions 1 3 1 5.3 Recommendations for Further Research I 3 6 REFERENCES 1 3 9 APPENDICES 1 4 2 APPENDIX I Input Form for Computerized Manage-ment Information System 142 APPENDIX II Beef .Model Matrix Data 192 APPENDIX III Beef Model Linear Programming . Solution . . . . . . . . 212 APPENDIX IV The Structure of Beef Model i n the F i r s t Quarter of Year 1 227 APPENDIX V Beef Cattle Prices . . . 229 - v -LIST OF TABLES Page CHAPTER III Table 3.1 Characteristics of Test Ranches. . . . 55 Table 3.2 Summary of Data Requirements i n Descriptive Budgeting Procedure. . . . 57 Table 3.3 Crop and Range A c t i v i t i e s Year 1 . . . 60 Table 3.4 Feed Purchased and Sold i n Year 1. . . 61 Table 3.5 Ration Composition Specified for Base Ranch . . 65 Table 3.6 Feed A l l o c a t i o n 66 Table 3.7 Livestock Sales and Losses for Summer, Year 1 . . . 6 7 Table 3.8 Miscellaneous Livestock Information Requirements . 67 Table 3.9 Mixed Hay Production Costs 7 3 Table 3.10 Livestock Production Costs 73 CHAPTER IV Table 4.1 Farm Inventory Report. 81 Table 4.2 Farm Income Statement 85 Table 4.3 Ratio Analysis of Income Statement . . 89 Table 4.4 Farm Cash Flow Statement 90 Table 4.5 Statement of Assets, L i a b i l i t i e s and Owner's Equity 93 Table 4.6 F i n a n c i a l Summary Statement 98 Table 4.7 Livestock Count 101 Table 4.8 Bound Levels As Set Under Various Options Tested 107 Table 4.9 Descriptive Budgeting vs. Feed P a r t i a l Optimization 110 Table 4.10 Descriptive Budgeting vs. Livestock P a r t i a l Optimization - Livestock Sales 114 Table 4.11 Descriptive Budgeting vs. Livestock P a r t i a l Optimization - Selected Fin a n c i a l Statements 115 Table 4.12 Livestock Count, P a r t i a l Optimization Procedure 116 Table 4.13 Livestock Count Under Feeding and Finishing Alternatives 120 Table 4.14 Selected Fi n a n c i a l Measures Base Ranch vs. Cattle Feeding Al t e r n a t i v e s . 121 Table 4.15 Descriptive Budgeting vs. Optimization Selected Financial Measures ; 123 - v i -Page CHAPTER IV (Cont'd.) Table 4.16 Net Returns to Rancher Under Income Assurance Program 125 Table 4.17 Selected Fi n a n c i a l Measures Under Income Assurance Program 126 Table 4.18 Fina n c i a l Summary of Model Options Tested , 127 - v i i -LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTER II Figure 2.1 Flow of Farm Data to Generated Reports CHAPTER III Figure 3.1 Structure of the Multiperiod Beef Ranching Model Figure 3.2 Detailed Description of Feed Sub-matrices, F i r s t Quarter Year 1 . . . . Figure 3.3 Detailed Description of Animal Submatrices, Spring, Summer and F a l l of Year 1 CHAPTER IV Figure 4.1 Interdependence of Balance Sheet to Financial Reports and Input Form . . Figure 4.2 Cattle Feeding Alternatives v i i i -ACKNOWLE DGMENTS The author wishes to express sincere appreciation to Dr. J . Graham, his dis s e r t a t i o n advisor, for his assistance i n defining the problem and keeping the model in proper perspective. Appreciation i s extended to the members of the author's thesis committee for o f f e r i n g counsel and valuable suggestions for t h i s research. This study was made possible through a contract from Agriculture Canada, Economics Branch through the CANFARM Data System. Sincere appreciation i s expressed to both bodies for t h e i r support. F u l l recognition i s given to the contribution made by ranchers and d i s t r i c t a g r i c u l t u r a l i s t s who gave generously of t h e i r time and knowledge. Ms. S. Atkins, Mr. J. Kidder and Mr. D. Patterson are thanked for the i r work i n debugging and v e r i f y i n g the model. CHAPTER I Introduction Many attempts to use l i n e a r programming on a routine basis to solve extension problems cannot be regarded as being very successful. This i s pa r t l y due to the fact that many computer programs which are suitable for the solution of research problems have less use i n aiding farmers solve t h e i r problems. The extension worker generally requires a model that has a f a i r l y fixed structure, but u t i l i z e s a l ternative data bases. He often uses t h i s as a budgeting device i n that he changes the data on successive runs and observes the ef f e c t s of data modification on r e s u l t s . In contrast, the researcher often desires a model that retains fixed data, thus enabling as much f l e x i b i l i t y as possible i n changing the structure of the model from one experimental application to the next (Candler; et a l . 1970). This study i s concern.ed with the development and operation of a computerized cow-calf, cow-yearling management informa-ti o n system that may be used to a s s i s t ranchers, extension personnel and farm management s p e c i a l i s t s i n t h e i r decision making process. The scope of the study i s such that the management information system i s s p e c i f i c to a commercial cow-calf, cow-yearling beef ranch. By providing relevant information, the model w i l l hopefully support the - 2 -hypothesis that the economic position of the operator can be improved because t h i s information w i l l enable the operator to evaluate the e f f e c t of management decisions on future f i n a n c i a l flows before resources are committed. Intensive formal farm planning i s thus made feasible by the use of a li n e a r programming model supplemented by an input form, matrix generator and a report writer software. 1.1 Statement of the Problem For many decades researchers and extension personnel i n the a g r i c u l t u r a l sector have attempted to improve the economic v i a b i l i t y of farmers. They have done so by concentrating on a problem, finding a solution to that problem and then through a d i f f u s i o n process that solution has become common pra c t i c e . Economists, through t h e i r planning e f f o r t s have participated i n t h i s problem i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , research and the d i f f u s i o n process and t h i s study i s s i m i l a r l y directed. Ranchers have many production, marketing and f i n a n c i a l problems. To l i s t a few: (1) Which forage/pasture system best f i t s the ranch? (2) Should the rancher winter calves or s e l l y e a r l -ings next f a l l and what price for yearlings w i l l j u s t i f y the added costs of wintering? (3) How w i l l an increase or decrease i n the costs of certai n items a f f e c t the t o t a l farm plan? - 3 -(4) Given a three year cycle i n beef prices can c a t t l e numbers be adjusted so as to take advantage of the cycle? B a s i c a l l y , these and s i m i l a r questions amount to "what i s the most p r o f i t a b l e set of alternatives and which system w i l l allow the rancher to u t i l i z e his resources and management s k i l l i n the most e f f i c i e n t manner?" This i s the main problem facing most ranchers. In t r y i n g to solve these problems i t i s recognized that d i f f e r e n t approaches are possible. Budgeting i s one of the techniques used i n the decision making process. A s p e c i f i c problem can be tackled and s p e c i f i c answers generated. Some of the s p e c i f i c problems outlined above may be answered through a p a r t i a l budgeting process. However, i t i s noted that the importance given to i n d i v i d u a l problems change from time to time, new problems a r i s e , and therefore i t i s desirable to design a solution procedure that i s capable of answering or providing information to many di f f e r e n t problems. I t i s recognized that ranchers operate in a dynamic environment, have given resources, and attempt to i d e n t i f y problems and c l a r i f y the consequences of alternative courses of action. E f f e c t i v e decisions require an inflow of useful information which w i l l a s s i s t them i n solving short and medium term production and a l l o c a t i o n problems. Use of the model and information system developed i n t h i s study may allow i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of some - 4 -rancher's problems and by providing information on the v i a b i l i t y of alternatives the farm business may be improved. Longer term c a p i t a l budgeting problems also need to be solved by ranchers. Decisions made with respect to long term investments require evaluation. The economic position of most ranchers i s such that the a c q u i s i t i o n of additional c a p i t a l resources must be financed from borrowed funds. Self-owned and/or i n t e r n a l l y generated c a p i t a l i s generally i n s u f f i c i e n t and as a r e s u l t , larger proportions of the firm's t o t a l assets are being c r e d i t financed. Consequently, p r i n c i p a l and i n t e r e s t payments need to be evaluated i n r e l a t i o n to the cash flows that are generated. The manage-ment information system developed allows for t h i s evaluation. In summary, conventional p a r t i a l budgeting techniques have provided the p r i n c i p a l tool for ta c k l i n g farm planning problems. They have proved to be e f f e c t i v e for many problems. The technique can, however, compare only the r e s u l t s of the budgets developed, and i n most instances because of the tediousness of such procedures only a limited number of alternatives are budgeted. Alternatives often e x i s t that are not considered which are more p r o f i t a b l e . A solution procedure that w i l l simultaneously consider a large number of input and product variables i s more complete and should provide more accurate answers to the resource a l l o c a t i o n problem. - 5 -1.2 Objectives of the Study The primary objective of t h i s study was the development of a computerized farm management information system that would allow beef ranchers to analyze t h e i r economic position and thereby improve i t . An associated set of objectives was accomplished before the primary goal was attained, namely: (1) I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of important planning problems facing cow-calf and cow-yearling operators. (2) Development of a model that would represent the ranching firm and indicate solutions to problems and yet remain s u f f i c i e n t l y f l e x i b l e so as to enable i t s use on ranches with varying production seasons and problems i n d i f f e r e n t areas of Canada. (3) Provision of a software package that allows for routine use of the model by extension personnel, researchers and farm managers. (4) V e r i f i c a t i o n of the model and software package. (5) Evaluation of d i f f e r e n t ranch management strategies. 1.3 Research Procedure The steps required to achieve these objectives are out-l i n e d below: (1) I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the problems involved discus-sions with beef ranchers, researchers, d i s t r i c t a g r i c u l t u r a l i s t s and other knowledgeable groups associated with the industry. Contact with - 6 -these groups allowed for an understanding of the production and marketing problems faced by ranchers. (2) Model development involved d e f i n i t i o n of the appropriate variables or courses of action open to ranchers, a d e f i n i t i o n of the resource con-s t r a i n t s and transformation of these into a simultaneous system of equations that coulid be solved thus i n d i c a t i n g optimal action for given resources and objectives. A preliminary l i n e a r programming model was constructed, solved and tested. The c o e f f i c i e n t s necessary for t h i s model were defined and thereafter a more general model which allowed adaptation to any given ranch was developed. In t h i s more general but farm-specific case the rancher i d e n t i f i e s the set of a c t i v i t i e s and production alternatives appropriate to h i s ranch and the solution of the model indicates a plan of action relevant to his s i t u a t i o n . (3) Concurrently with the l a t t e r part of step (2) i t was necessary to develop an input form or data gathering schedule that would allow i n d i v i d u a l ranchers to define t h e i r ranching system. A matrix generator was developed that allowed t h i s "user" or i n d i v i d u a l rancher-s data to be trans-formed into the appropriate row and column codes - 7 -and c o e f f i c i e n t s and thereafter allowed solution of the li n e a r programming matrix through a MPSX software package. The report writing software package transforms the MPSX output into a report that i s readable and allows for convenient and rapid evaluation of the r e s u l t s . (4) The v e r i f i c a t i o n stage involved continued commun-i c a t i o n between those concerned and refinement of the input form, the model and the reports. The model i n i t s various stages of refinement was tested on ten d i f f e r e n t ranching situations. (5) Once the model had been tested i n the f i e l d i t was used as a research t o o l i n evaluating d i f f e r e n t ranch management strategies. In addition, the implications of a newly formed a g r i c u l t u r a l p o l i c y were examined. 1.4 Organization of the Study This thesis i s divided into four remaining chapters. In Chapter II a review of related research material i s presented. The discussion focuses on th e o r e t i c a l problems that arise and concludes with a presentation of the conceptual framework for the model developed. In Chapter III the beef model i s presented and described i n d e t a i l . The relationship between the model and the data gathered through an input information system i s highlighted. The results are the topic of Chapter IV and the reports generated are described - 8 -in d e t a i l . Model experimentation i s also undertaken i n t h i s chapter and the results are documented. Chapter V summarizes t h i s work with a discussion of the p r i n c i p a l findings and conclusions and recommendations for further research. CHAPTER II THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND CONCEPTS This chapter w i l l review t h e o r e t i c a l aspects pertinent to t h i s study. As previously stated the p r i n c i p a l objective of the study i s the development of a beef management informa-t i o n system. Reality s p e c i f i e s that t h i s system take into account the dynamic nature of the beef industry. The f i r s t section of t h i s Chapter therefore examines the problem of dynamics and the decision process of the firm over time. The discussion i s relevant since model structure i s determined by how the researcher interprets the decision making process over time. It follows that i n addition to the problem of dynamics and the decision process, r i s k and uncertainty must be considered. This problem i s the subject of section 2.2. Section 2.3 i s a review of d i f f e r e n t modelling techniques, namely multiperiod, recursive models and other simulation methods and how these methods treat decision making over time. The advantages, l i m i t a t i o n s and what other researchers have considered to be the most important c r i t e r i a were noted and t h i s subsequently lead to the conceptualization of the model developed i n t h i s study which i s presented i n section 2.4. Since the study i s also concerned with the development of a computerized manage-ment information system, a review of packages presently operational and t h e i r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s follows. - 10 -2.1 The Dynamic Problem and the D e c i s i o n Process Economists have d i f f e r e d s l i g h t l y i n t h e i r use of the term "dynamics". Hicks (194 6, p. 115) noted: "Economic s t a t i c s concerns p a r t o f economic theory where we do not t r o u b l e about d a t i n g ; economic dynamics those p a r t s where every q u a n t i t y must be dated." Baumol (1964, p. 4) argues t h a t economic dynamics i s the study o f economic phenomena i n r e l a t i o n to p r e c e d i n g and succeeding events, and Harrod (1948, p. 8), s i m i l a r to Baumol's n o t i o n , s t a t e s t h a t : "...dynamics w i l l s p e c i f i c a l l y be concerned w i t h the e f f e c t s of c o n t i n u i n g changes and w i t h the r a t e s of changes i n the v a l u e s t h a t have to be determined." The s a l i e n t f e a t u r e i n d e a l i n g w i t h economic dynamics i s the time dimension o f the v a r i a b l e s and i n the study of dynamic phenomena such as m u l t i p e r i o d p r o d u c t i o n models and f i r m growth, the r e s e a r c h e r must c o n s i d e r v a r i a b l e s r e l a t i v e t o p r o d u c t i o n or growth as p e r i o d i c f u n c t i o n s of time. I t i s apparent t h a t the dynamic nature o f the farm f i r m and the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the time element i n p r o d u c t i o n and investment p r o c e s s e s , renders the t r a d i t i o n a l s t a t i c theory of the f i r m somewhat i n s u f f i c i e n t . The problem i n the s t a t i c t heory of the f i r m i s t h a t of choosing a s i n g l e course o f a c t i o n from a s e t of a l t e r n a t i v e s , i n one time p e r i o d . By s p e c i f y i n g a s p e c i f i c value f o r each of a number o f v a r i a b l e s a course of a c t i o n may be determined s u b j e c t t o c o n s t r a i n t s which may b r o a d l y be c l a s s i f i e d as demand c o n s t r a i n t s , supply c o n s t r a i n t s , and t r a n s f o r m a t i o n or - 11 -production function constraints. Physical and i n s t i t u t i o n a l factors as well as behavioural factors determine the form of these constraints. The s t a t i c model s u f f i c e s for a broad range of economic decisions. However, s t a t i c theory cannot be of much a s s i s -tance as an explanation of anticipatory decision-making over time. Forecasts or decisions concerning the future play no role i n t h i s approach as i t endeavours to explain behaviour in terms of the "present". S t a t i c theory assumes either that there i s no future or that every future period i s an exact r e p l i c a of the current period regardless of the present course of action taken by the firm. Dynamic models of economic behaviour on the other hand recognize that decision-makers' interests extend beyond the current period and that t h e i r present actions may both influence the conditions which w i l l confront decision-makers i n the future and l i m i t t h e i r future freedom of action. Hicks (1946, p. 194) recognizing the l i m i t a t i o n s of s t a t i c theory developed a dynamic decision-making model of the firm under certainty. As i n s t a t i c theory, the firm chooses from among alternative available courses of action, the one that i s most conducive to the achievement of i t s goal. Hicks concludes that the decision problem confronting the firm at any given point of time i s the selection of the entire best course of action over the horizon and states that: - 12 -"Just as the s t a t i c problem of the enterprise i s the selection of a certain set of quan-t i t i e s of factors and products, so the dynamic problem i s the selection of a c e r t a i n produc-ti o n plan from the alternatives that are open..." and "...the decision which confronts any p a r t i c u l a r entrepreneur at any data...may be regarded as the establishment of a production plan." In other words, at the beginning of each i n t e r v a l the firm selects the values of a l l the components of a l l the moves over the entire horizon which j o i n t l y maximize the pay-off function subject to the constraints. To solve t h i s maximiza-t i o n problem over the entire horizon requires forming d e f i n i t e anticipations about the s p e c i f i c form of every future constraint. The firm then proceeds to implement i t s selection with respect to the components of the f i r s t move. The remaining part of the solution, that i s , the values assigned to the components of l a t e r moves, represents the plan for future operations. Modigliani & Cohen (1961, p. 19) argue that the Hicksian model of r a t i o n a l decision-making under certainty does not stand up to observed behaviour. They state that: "The assumption of certainty usually involves, e x p l i c i t l y or i m p l i c i t l y , the notion that information about the future i s single-valued, known to be correct, and i s 'inborn' i n the agent or can be acquired and exploited by him without s i g n i f i c a n t cost or e f f o r t . " They modify the assumption of certainty i n three ways. F i r s t , they continue to regard anticipations as single-valued, however they assume that the agent recognizes that his single-- 13 -valued expectations are not e n t i r e l y r e l i a b l e . Secondly, they further recognize that at a p a r t i c u l a r date, more r e l i a b l e information about the future can be acquired only at the cost of devoting scarce resources to t h i s task, while the cost of acquiring t h i s information decreases as the future draws nearer. Thirdly, they take into account the fact that problem-solving and planning as parts of the decision making process are a l l costly a c t i v i t i e s i n that they absorb scarce resources, and therefore are to be avoided unless the return from such a c t i v i t i e s promises to exceed th e i r cost. Given t h i s modified viewpoint Modigliani & Cohen state: "The decision problem confronting the entrepreneur at a given point of time i s most us e f u l l y regarded not as that of selec t i n g the best possible plan of opera-t i o n over the horizon, but rather, as that s e l e c t i n g the best possible f i r s t move only." The conceptual difference then between Hicks and Modigliani and Cohen i s that the l a t t e r authors place major emphasis on the f i r s t period of the planning period and treat the l a t e r periods of the planning horizon i n less d e t a i l than the f i r s t period. This approach stresses the point that when information becomes available through time the decision makers w i l l have to revise t h e i r plans. Long-run plans are therefore made only to u t i l i z e a l l the available information to make the best possible plan for the f i r s t time period. The model developed in thi s study i s constructed such that the f i r s t period of the planning horizon i s emphasized - 14 -but the decision process over the entire time horizon i s also accounted for. Since the construction of a decision-making model depends on how the model builder interprets the firm's decision making process over time, i t should be noted that the matrix structure of the model developed i s in fact a compromise of the Hicksian and Modigliani's concepts of the dynamic decision process of the firm. 2.2 Risk and Uncertainty Due to the time element involved i n a g r i c u l t u r a l production, perfect knowledge i s precluded. The environment i n which a farm operates i s highly variable due to f l u c t u a -tions i n y i e l d s , prices and technology, etc. and wrong expectations and actions have s i g n i f i c a n t impact on the economic v i a b i l i t y of the farm. Knight (1921, p. 2) stated that decision makers face two d i f f e r e n t knowledge situations, r i s k and uncertainty. Risk i s defined as situations where pr o b a b i l i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n s for future events are known well enough to ensure against. Uncertainty i s of a subjective nature, the d i s t r i b u t i o n of outcomes i s generally unknown and i t cannot therefore be ensured against. Risk does not a l t e r the decision-making process as structured by economic p r i n c i p l e s under perfect knowledge since r i s k can be incor-porated as a cost i n the farm firm. Uncertainty on the other hand i s most d i f f i c u l t to deal with when farm managers formulate production and investment plans. - 15 -Heady (1952, pp. 439-464) summarized types of uncer-ta i n t y as: Price Uncertainty - Most farmers face competitive market situ a t i o n s , prices vary i n accordance with changes i n many factors such as actions of related producers, consumer tastes, the degree of national prosperity, random disturbances generated by weather fluctuations, etc. A l l these changes are exogenous to the farm operator. Y i e l d Uncertainty - Mainly caused by weather flu c t u a t i o n , insects, disease and other b i o l o g i c a l factors which are not predictable. Technological Uncertainty - Caused by innovation, invention of a new machine or process or improvement of an old one. The uncertainty arises when a farm operator must consider investment i n a machine or technique at present, versus the future where the same machine or technique may be available at a d i f f e r e n t cost. I n s t i t u t i o n a l and So c i o l o g i c a l Uncertainty - This uncer-ta i n t y i s caused by changes i n government programs or p o l i c i e s , national p o l i c i e s and so forth. In t h i s study an attempt i s made to deal with the forms of uncertainty outlined above. In the model developed price and y i e l d uncertainty are not dealt with i n a stochastic programming manner, however the manager i s able to deal with uncertainty i n d i r e c t l y by varying prices and yi e l d s i n future time periods according to his expectations. The approach was considered appropriate since the model - 16 -developed i s to be used i n an extension environment and the cost to the user must be taken into consideration. The r development of a stochastic programming model would increase complexity, solution time and cost. The added benefits of tr e a t i n g uncertainty i n a stochastic manner may be out-weighed by the increased user cost and loss of extension acceptance. Different innovations and the benefits thereof may be considered in the model developed by changing certain c o e f f i c i e n t s or by evaluating d i f f e r e n t proposals i n a successive nature. I n s t i t u t i o n a l uncertainty i s evaluated i n t h i s work. The application of a newly conceived farm income assurance program for the B r i t i s h Columbia cattlemen i s considered. The following section reviews models that have dealt with farm planning problems and examines how the concept of decision making over time has been incorporated by those concerned with the work. 2.3 Farm Planning Methods Involving Time In the preceeding section the dynamic problems associ-ated with investigating the farm firm decision process were examined. It was noted that the concept of the decision process over time was important when considering firm growth and consequently a f f e c t s the empirical model and planning technique used. In t h i s section a review of methods used i n dealing with dynamic farm planning problems i s presented. - 17 -2.3.1 M u l t i p e r i o d L i n e a r Programming Models Swanson (1955, pp. 1249-1258) used a m u l t i p e r i o d l i n e a r programming technique t o d e a l w i t h the problem of farm p l a n n i n g over time. He d e s c r i b e d h i s model as: "...an attempt to d e a l with the problem of p l a n n i n g over time. That i s , more than, one p e r i o d of p r o d u c t i o n i s con-s i d e r e d . . . a long run farm p l a n with a t r a n s i t i o n year i s ... s p e c i f i e d . " The model had a time h o r i z o n of f i v e y a r s ; some a c t i v i t i e s c ontinued over the e n t i r e h o r i z o n , others r e p r e s e n t e d the t r a n s i t i o n year o n l y , and o t h e r s allowed f o r a l l years f o l l o w i n g t r a n s i t i o n . An a c t i v i t y t r a n s f e r r e d income from one year to the next, above a minimum annual consumption and f i x e d c o s t allowance. The m u l t i p e r i o d l i n e a r programming model may be expressed as: Maximize CX s u b j e c t to AX < B X > 0 where C i s the o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n or row v e c t o r of net r e t u r n s from a u n i t of a c t i v i t y ; X i s a column v e c t o r of a l t e r n a t i v e a c t i v i t i e s , i t extends over a l l p r o d u c t i o n p e r i o d s ; B i s a column v e c t o r of resource a v a i l a b i l i t i e s , composed of a number of subvectors; each sub-v e c t o r s p e c i f i e s the a v a i l a b i l i t y of resources f o r a given p r o d u c t i o n p e r i o d ; A i s a matrix c o n s i s t i n g of a number of submatrices as shown below: - 18 -A = Each sub-matrix c o n t a i n s c o e f f i c i e n t s of t r a n s -formation f o r p r o d u c t i o n p e r i o d 1,2, . . t r e s p e c t i v e l y . By grouping c o e f f i c i e n t s with r e s p e c t to time i n t o a number of submatrices the model becomes dynamic. The m a t r i x A c o n t a i n s elements which l i n k the d e c i s i o n s of one time p e r i o d t o those of the next and the model i s then dynamic i n the H i c k s i a n sense. The importance of the t r a n s i t i o n a c t i v i t i e s i n the m u l t i p e r i o d model as o u t l i n e d by Swanson are r e c o g n i z e d i n t h i s study by a l l o w i n g balances be t r a n s f e r r e d from year to year through a t r a n s i t i o n a c t i v i t i e s . There are some weaknesses i n u s i n g t h i s technique. L i k e a l l l i n e a r models the m u l t i p e r i o d model assumes a l l i n p u t s are p e r f e c t l y d i v i s i b l e and t h a t p e r f e c t knowledge about p r i c e and i n p u t - o u t p u t c o e f f i c i e n t s e x i s t . In a d d i -t i o n i f the farm manager makes d e c i s i o n s i n a s e q u e n t i a l n ature, the simultaneous s o l u t i o n f o r a l l p e r i o d s found by t h i s method may be somewhat u n r e a l i s t i c . L o f t s g a r d & Heady (1959, pp. 51-57), r e c o g n i z e d these l i m i t a t i o n s and c o n s t r u c t e d a more d e t a i l e d v e r s i o n of a m u l t i p e r i o d l i n e a r model. Through a p p l i c a t i o n to a case - 19 -farm, the authors i l l u s t r a t e d that annual plans changed gradually between years and that the optimum plan for any one year was dependent on the optimum plan of other years. The planning horizon was eight years and maximizing d i s -counted returns served as the optimizing c r i t e r i o n . The authors found that farm plans for successive years was dependent upon the family l i v i n g expenses required i n p a r t i c u l a r years. Projected l i v i n g expenditures affected the manner i n which c a p i t a l and other resources were allocated among various crop and livestock enterprises. There were, however, li m i t a t i o n s i n t h e i r model that s t i l l plague farm growth models, namely: (1) the model depicted the short run i n the sense that no land, building or machinery investments were con-sidered ; (2) the external c a p i t a l market was not considered. The authors assumed the c a p i t a l transfer process was a l l owned funds; (3) no allowance was made for r i s k and uncertainty; (4) income taxes and s o c i a l security are omitted; (5) the maximization of the discounted sum of net revenue may not be appropriate because of other objectives; (6) consumption was a constant and not made a function of current or the past year's income. Johnson, T e f e r t i l l e r & Moor (1967, pp. 908-919) recog-nized the li m i t a t i o n s as encountered by Loftsgard and Heady and consequently added certa i n important dimensions to t h e i r - 20 -analysis of the firm over time. They noted that i f farm growth can be defined i n terms of asset accumulation, conven-t i o n a l , nonstochastic l i n e a r programming techniques may be employed, but r i s k needed to be considered. They allowed a number of the matrix c o e f f i c i e n t s to be stochastic and consequently feasible rates of growth become variable. They assumed crop y i e l d s to consist of two components--a base value and a random element. The model was applied to an examination of the growth problem for a farm representative of an area i n the Texas High Plains. It proved to be use-f u l in providing basic information for studying decision problems related to farm growth, and for the establishing of a correspondence between observed types of farm behaviour and feasible rates of growth. Johnson (1967) noted that a major problem i s i n the "... choice between using p r o b a b i l i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n s of raw data or using the best t h e o r e t i c a l f i t that can be obtained from the data. In the f i r s t case, a l l that one i s doing i s simulat-ing the past." Boehlje & White (1969, pp. 546-563) approached the dynamic problem of firm analysis by considering the enter-prise choice question each year. Their model did not have stochastic elements, however investment decisions were included i n the analysis. Both net worth and disposable income were accounted for i n the objective functions. The authors demonstrated the in t e r a c t i o n between investment and production decisions i n the growth process. Results i n d i -cated that under r e a l i s t i c conditions optimal firm growth - 21 -was not constant. The growth process consistently included the substitution of c a p i t a l for labour as the a v a i l a b i l i t y of labour became more r e s t r i c t e d and c a p i t a l a v a i l a b i l i t y increased. The substitution of c a p i t a l for labour and changes i n farm enterprises i l l u s t r a t e d that the interdepen-dency of investment and production decisions must be con-sidered and that a planning horizon beyond the current production period should be considered i f optimal investment and production decisions are to be made. A comparison of the two optimizing c r i t e r i a revealed that the disposable income c r i t e r i o n tends to favour i n t e r n a l generation of funds, while the net worth c r i t e r i o n favours external generation. Net worth optimization, however, resulted i n a heavy debt load, and the amount of disposable income available to s a t i s f y farm family consumption was r e s t r i c t e d . When disposable income was maximized, substantially less net worth was generated and less c r e d i t used. Boehlje & White (196 9) point out that increasing model complexity usually e n t a i l s increasing costs which r e l a t i v e to benefits may be too high. Martin (1967, p. 1) made a further contribution to farm analysis i n a dynamic environment by incorporating longer run investment aspects. The model constructed used the optimal farm solution from a minimum resource base as a composite single a c t i v i t y (defined on a per acre b a s i s ) . A l l other a c t i v i t i e s were investment a c t i v i t i e s , or handled the transfer of funds between years. A desirable feature - 22 -of the model was t h a t investment i n durables was c o n s i d e r e d and borrowing was allowed based on e q u i t y and the type of a s s e t t o be purchased. S e v e r a l o b j e c t i v e s were examined and one-shot investment funds and annual l i q u i d i t y r e q u i r e -ments were s p e c i f i c a l l y accounted f o r i n the model. No o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r d i s i n v e s t m e n t and no r i s k elements were co n s i d e r e d . The model was most u s e f u l i n p o i n t i n g out how some of the l i m i t a t i o n s i n L o f t s g a r d and Heady's (1959) work c o u l d be t a c k l e d . 2.3.2 Recursive L i n e a r Programming Models Day (1963, p. 1) d e f i n e s r e c u r s i v e programming as: "...a sequence of mathematical programming problems i n which the parameters o f a given problem are f u n c t i o n a l l y r e l a t e d to the optimal v a r i a b l e s of p r e c e d i n g problems of the sequence....Like dynamic programming, i t dea l s with the dynamics of d e c i s i o n making; but u n l i k e dynamic programming i t uses s e q u e n t i a l o p t i m i z i n g t o e x p l a i n behaviour and does not attempt to d e v i s e optimal d e c i s i o n r u l e s which l e a d t o o p t i m a l p o l i c i e s over the time p e r i o d c o n s i d e r e d . " I t i s apparent from t h i s d e f i n i t i o n t h a t p a s t e x p e c t a t i o n s and performance are important, and consequently, the pro-cedure i s a p p l i c a b l e t o a wide v a r i e t y of dynamic problems i n the f i e l d of p o s i t i v e economic a n a l y s i s . Heidhues (1966, pp. 668-684) used t h i s technique to develop a model of i n d i v i d u a l farm changes which i n c l u d e d e x p l i c i t l y s a v i n g s , investments and growth. The technique was s i m i l a r t o con-v e n t i o n a l l i n e a r programming but was s o l v e d i n a s e q u e n t i a l manner f o r numerous p e r i o d s of time r a t h e r than simultane-o u s l y . R e s t r i c t i o n s i n any given year depend on the s o l u t i o n - 23 -for the previous year. F l e x i b i l i t y constraints, consisting of upper and lower bounds on cert a i n variables were used to represent temporary l i m i t s placed upon the growth process by external factors. Heidhues s p e c i f i c a l l y considered two dynamic factors i n farm adjustment: the environmental e f f e c t of technological and price variations, and the e f f e c t of a r i s i n g nonfarm standard of l i v i n g on farmer income expecta-tions . According to the Heidhues model, the resource vector B(t) i n each period i s dependent upon the solution for the preceding period. The dependent relationship i s described as: B(t) = A(t - l ) AX(t-l) + yB(t-l) + V(t) where B(t) = a column vector of available amounts of fixed resources and numerical values of other constraints at the beginning of period t. A = a diagonal transformation matrix that serves to transfer capacities r e s u l t i n g from investments i n factors to capacities of the respective constraints as well as accumulated c a p i t a l between periods and to remove exhausted resources from the model; Y = a diagonal transformation matrix which trans-fers a l l or parts of the capacities of the fixed resources available i n one period to the next; - 24 -V(t) = a vector specifying exogeneous changes. The key concept of the model i s that adjustments take place over time. This af f e c t s both quasi-fixed factor supply l i m i t s and uncertainty and thus a learning period can be b u i l t i n . Heidhues's model was used to analyze the eff e c t s of four European Economic Community p o l i c y alternatives on d i f f e r e n t types of farms i n Northern Germany. He concluded that the evaluation of growth p o s s i b i l i t i e s was based on the a b i l i t y of farms to accumulate investment c a p i t a l r e l a t i v e to the investment need projected by the model. However since recursive programming s t i l l employs the conventional l i n e a r format i t suffers from i t s drawbacks. It solves for each period independently of a l l future periods and does not allow for the a l l o c a t i o n of resources among periods, suboptimiza-tion may r e s u l t . In addition, t h i s technique does not take into account expectations about future conditions and out-comes. It also suffers from the d i v i s i b i l i t y problem. In addition to the above examples, the following authors have also used the recursive programming method i n farm analysis: Schaller (1965); Johnson (1969) and Edwards (1959). 2.3.3 Non-Analytic Models The preceding discussion indicated how models attempt to simulate the behaviour of a farm firm over time. "Simula-t i o n " i s a vague word with many meanings. Shubik's (1960, p. 907) d e f i n i t i o n i s as follows: - 25 -"A s i m u l a t i o n of a system or an organism i s the o p e r a t i o n of a model or s i m u l a t o r which i s a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of the system or organism. The model i s amenable to manipulations which would be i m p o s s i b l e , too expensive, or i m p r a c t i c a l to perform on the e n t i t y i t p o r t r a y s . The o p e r a t i o n of the model can be s t u d i e d and, from i t , p r o p e r t i e s c oncerning the behaviour of the a c t u a l system or i t s subsystem can be i. i n f e r r e d . " From the above d e f i n i t i o n the s a l i e n t f e a t u r e s of computer s i m u l a t i o n i n v o l v e m o d e l - b u i l d i n g and experiment-conducting. A mathematical or l o g i c a l model t h a t d e s c r i b e s the behaviour o f a system and i s then used f o r experimentation f i t s the broad d e f i n i t i o n o f s i m u l a t i o n . Economists o f t e n use optim-i z i n g or non-optimizing models f o r s i m u l a t i o n . P a t r i c k & E i s g r u b e r (1968) d e a l t w i t h farm p l a n n i n g over time. In t h e i r n o n - a n a l y t i c model, the d e c i s i o n maker's expectations with regard t o f u t u r e p r i c e s and y i e l d s , the s e l e c t i o n of a l t e r n a t i v e farm p l a n s , e v a l u a t i o n of the expected outcomes of the p l a n s w i t h r e s p e c t t o goals and the implementations of the p l a n o f f e r i n g the h i g h e s t l e v e l o f o v e r a l l s a t i s f a c t i o n were e x p l i c i t l y c o n s i d e r e d . S i m u l a t i o n methods were a p p l i e d to a h y p o t h e t i c a l farm f i r m under t h r e e d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of management a b i l i t y and twenty-seven d i f f e r e n t c a p i t a l market s t r u c t u r e s f o r a p e r i o d o f twenty y e a r s . The study i n d i c a t e d t h a t the management a b i l i t y of the farm operator was the major f a c t o r i n determining the r a t e of growth of the farm f i r m . High l e v e l s of t e c h n i c a l e f f i c i e n c y r e s u l t i n high l e v e l s o f farm income, net worth accumulation, and the p o s s i b i l i t y of higher l e v e l s of consumption. Long-term - 26 -loan l i m i t s was also found to be a s i g n i f i c a n t factor a f f e c t i n g farm firm growth. Eisgruber (1967) and Hutton (1966) both note simula-t i o n models are often nonanalytic, however i f a n a l y t i c -optimizing models can handle the s i t u a t i o n they may be preferred i f some function i s to be maximized or minimized. Non-analytic models have t h e i r place when the decision process to be described i s extremely complex, and ana l y t i c approaches either have not been or cannot be developed. These include situations with (1) multiple goals, (2) i n d i v i s i b i l i t i e s , (3) sequential decisions within the planning period, using d i f f e r e n t c r i t e r i a , (4) nonlinear functions, (5) concepts of organizational, managerial and behaviour theories. Eisgruber (1967) found that assumptions of p r o f i t maximization and perfect knowledge do not have to be made and noneconomic costs and returns can be included with r e l a t i v e ease. In addition the authors note that simulation offers the researcher the option of focussing on i n t r a firm relationships and changing key factors while holding other factors constant. Also, the time paths of variables are known, whereas i n standard l i n e a r programming and marginal analysis only the equilibrium position i s known. Each of the authors discussed above have made impor-tant contributions to the conceptualization of the model developed i n t h i s study. Swanson (1955) indicated the •. need for t r a n s i t i o n a c t i v i t i e s i n a multiperiod model. - 27 -Loftsgard and Heady (1959) stressed the importance of family l i v i n g expenditures i n the decision process. Johnson et a l . (1967) demonstrated that the element of r i s k may be brought into conventional l i n e a r programming techniques. Beohlje & White (1969) investigated d i f f e r e n t objective function c r i t e r i a i n farm planning over time. Day (1963) and Heidhues (1966) demonstrated how recursive l i n e a r programming models may be used. The importance of farmer expectations and the a b i l i t y to accumulate investment c a p i t a l were also noted. Patrick and Eisgruber (1968) demonstrated how non-analytic methods may handle situations where l i n e a r programming methods are not applicable. In a l l cases the emphasis placed on the models was of a research nature. In certain cases the models were too complicated or too costly to operate as a p r a c t i c a l farm decision a i d . These readings led to the conclusion that multiperiod l i n e a r programming i s appropriate for dealing with firm decision making over time. This method adapts e a s i l y to the dynamic decision process as outlined by Hicks (1946) and Modigliani and Cohen (1961). Furthermore, the a v a i l a -b i l i t y of the l i n e a r algorithm and i t s wide use and acceptance was considered important. The model developed i n t h i s thesis has the f l e x i b i l i t y of being used recursively as out-lined by Day (1963). As optimization of the farm plan i s required,. and the non-analytic methods as described by Eisgruber (1967) are considered inappropriate since there i s no guarantee that the solution obtained i s optimal. 2.4 Conceptual Framework of the Model Developed In constructing the model for t h i s study the assump-tio n i s taken that the farm operator i s interested i n the ranch's growth as measured by maximization of net returns subject to withdrawals for family consumption, investment, resource constraints, etc. The basic p r i n c i p l e of growth i s to acquire control of additional productive resources by paying a price less than they w i l l earn. Funds required are either from i n t e r n a l or external sources. Restrictions are generally related to physical and f i n a n c i a l conditions and the objective to maximizing the farm's net worth. Growth may refer to an increase i n the firm size which i s measured i n terms such as volume of output, quantity of resources and magnitude of accumulated worth, etc. Since these terms may not change i n the same dir e c -t i o n , namely, while some may increase and some others decrease, t h i s presents some d i f f i c u l t y i n measuring the net change i n the size of the firm. In t h i s study ranch growth i s measured by an increase i n net worth. The design of the model developed i s a compromise between Hicksian notion and that of Modiglianai and - 29 -Cohen (19 61) regarding the dynamic planning behaviour of the firm. Given the i n i t i a l farm s i t u a t i o n i n time period t , the rancher i s i n the Hicksian sense formulating a long-run plan to achieve his goals. The time horizon i n the model developed i n t h i s study i s three years. The rancher formu-lates single-valued expectations about prices and yi e l d s i n periods t ^ , t^, and t ^ and the plan for period t i s imple-mented. The plan i s unlikely to be carried out for the entire horizon due to the fact that the farmer expectations are subject to errors. As experiences are gained and new information becomes available, expectations change over time. Accordingly, expectations of prices and yiel d s i n periods t 2 and t ^ are revised. I t i s therefore seen that the rancher formulates a long-run plan with the aim of provid-ing himself with a basis for farm operation for the current year. This i s i n agreement with Modigliami and Cohen's notion that the firm t r i e s to make the best possible f i r s t move which cannot be postponed and must be carried out. The mathematical formulation of the multiperiod l i n e a r programm-ing model i s presented as: Maximize C(t+i) X (t+i) for i=0 l....k subject to A(t) A(t+1) A(t+k) X(t) ~B(t) X(t+1) B(t+1) • < • _X(t+k^ _B(t+k) X(t+i) > 0 - 30 -where C(t+i) i s a row vector of expected returns from a unit of alternative a c t i v i t i e s i n production period (t+i). The vector extended over the planning horizon of (k+1) years. X(t+i) i s a column vector consisting of subvectors, X(t), X(t+1).... (t+k). These subvectors contain alternative a c t i v i t i e s i n the produc-tion years of t, (t+1).... (t+k) respectively. A ( t ) , A(t+1)....A(t+k) are matrices containing c o e f f i c i e n t s of t r a n s i t i o n and input-output transformation for production years t, (t+1) ....(t+k) respectively. B(t), B (t+1) . . . .B (t+k) are vector of the amounts of resources available for the production years, t, (t+1).... (t+k) respectively. The model i s si m i l a r to a conventional l i n e a r pro-gramming model with the exception that i t extends over a number of years. This multi-period programming model i s dynamic i n the Hicksian sense as prices, inputs, and outputs are dated. Transfer a c t i v i t i e s i n the model allowing i n -come and surplus resources i n one period to be transferred to the subsequent period. In the following chapter the model as constructed w i l l be presented i n greater d e t a i l . 2.5 Review of Operational Management Information Systems In addition to model building t h i s study undertook the work of documenting the model's solution i n a format that - 31 -the user may quickly interpret the computer output. I t was therefore found to be useful to review present operational computerized management information systems. The u t i l i z a t i o n of mathematical techniques i n computer-ized farm management information systems has been undertaken by government, commercial and university organizations. Lanpher (1973) provides b r i e f descriptions of 425 computer programs reported by 4 8 states. These include farm account-ing and business analysis programs, farm optimization l i n e a r programming packages, farm simulation, budget generators and feed programs, f i n a n c i a l management and f e r t i l i z e r recommendation packages, and weed and insect i d e n t i f i c a t i o n packages. The most often used packages include the c l a s s i -c a l feed blending l i n e a r programming, business and accounting packages. Some of the programs are available through time-sharing, however most are batch processed. In Canada the largest and most successful computer-ized farm management information organization i s CANFARM. CANFARM i s a Federal, P r o v i n c i a l , University organization, dedicated to the promotion of p r o f i t a b l e farming i n Canada. Britney"1" states that the objectives of CANFARM are: "To further the development of p r o f i t a b l e farming i n Canada by designing, construct-ing, and operating a computerized farm Director of Research and Development, CANFARM. - 32 -management information system based primarily on data c o l l e c t e d from farm and off-farm sources and capable of servicing a l l Canadian farmers on an i n d i v i d u a l and voluntary basis. . . . . To provide uniform and comparable physical and f i n a n c i a l data on farming operations for extension, research and policy purposes." The core of the CANFARM i s the farm records system. Farm records enable the farm manager to evaluate the per-formance of his business with a view of diagnosing problem areas. In addition CANFARM off e r s farm planning programs as loan c a l c u l a t o r s , cash flow forecaster, ration formula-ti o n package, crop budgeting packages, and others. Numerous university organizations both i n the U.S. and Canada have entered the computerized management informa-t i o n f i e l d with considerable success. Ohio State University developed a system c a l l e d ACCESS which u t i l i z e d programs developed by other u n i v e r s i t i e s and by private industry. By becoming users of packages available and developed e l s e -where, Ohio State implements these with a f r a c t i o n of the problems and cost usually encountered. Michigan State University has made a major thrust towards developing a comprehensive teleprocessing system. Printer and voice response c a p a b i l i t y i s incorporated. Purdue University has had much success with i t s Corn-Hog Enterprise Budget model over many, years of use. Farmers and extension personnel have accepted the package as a useful planning aid. - 33 -In addition to government and university bodies, private companies sp e c i a l i z e i n researching, developing and monitoring programs for agriculture. To name a few; Compu-tone Systems, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, was one of the f i r s t companies to of f e r s p e c i f i c computer programs to agriculture as aids i n decision making through teleprocessing. Their i n i t i a l a pplication was i n least cost formulation for the animal and poultry feed industry and for emulsion products for the sausage industry. Maddy Associates, Inc., St. Louis, Missouri o f f e r a series of computer discussion and programs to the animal production industry. The Maddy system offers such advanced problem solving packages as Parametric Cost and Nutrient Ranging, Feed Inventory Control and Optimal Resource A l l o c a t i o n . In a l l the above ci t e d examples of management informa-tion systems available to agriculture the common element for success i s adequate output documentation. An information system cannot hope to achieve any l e v e l of success as an educational or in d i v i d u a l service i f the answers retrieved cannot be cor r e c t l y and e a s i l y interpreted by the user. A b r i e f description of the data and f i l e handling procedures for the key management information system i s presented i n Figure 2.1. The rancher's data deck a f t e r keypunching (non-zero records only) i s keyed from the ranch's input form presented i n Appendix I. A new f i l e i s completed (Ranch data f i l e zero and non-zero records) and i s stored on d i s c . This f i l e i s then used by the matrix generator - 34 -Ranch Data Deck Ranch Data F i l e Diagnostics Matrix F i l e Generator Complete LP Matrix Farm Reports Report Writer Figure 2.1 Flow of Farm Data to Generated Reports - 35 -package to create the MPSX li n e a r programming f i l e and a diagnostics f i l e which allows for detection of errors i n data preparation. The complete l i n e a r programming matrix i s presented i n Appendix I I . The problem i s solved through the use of IBM software package (MPSX), a solution i s obtained; presented i n Appendix I I I . The report writer system takes the MPSX solution and the ranch data f i l e and summarizes these re s u l t s into reports which allow for quick and early evaluation of the r e s u l t s . This chapter has presented t h e o r e t i c a l and conceptual considerations i n building a farm planning model. An examination of the decision process, i t s rela t i o n s h i p to dynamics and methods of dealing with r i s k and uncertainty, were investigated. Different planning methods involving time were discussed, weighing the advantages and disadvan-tages which led to the conceptual framework of the model developed i n t h i s t h e s i s . In the following chapter the empirical model w i l l be presented and described i n d e t a i l . - 36 -CHAPTER I I I THE EMPIRICAL MODEL The model developed r e p r e s e n t s the s t r u c t u r e and p r o d u c t i o n c o n d i t i o n s o f a beef ranch and i n c o r p o r a t e s d e c i s i o n v a r i a b l e s important to the rancher or d e c i s i o n maker. These v a r i a b l e s r e p r e s e n t the f e e d i n g and l i v e s t o c k a c t i v i t i e s and the cash flows a s s o c i a t e d with those a c t i v i t i e s . Presented below i s a d i s c u s s i o n of major conceptual problems t h a t a r i s e i n b u i l d i n g a model t h a t r e p r e s e n t s the t y p i c a l ranch s i t u a t i o n . These problems are d i s c u s s e d i n the context o f the model's a b i l i t y t o analyze r e l e v a n t problems and p r e s e n t s o l u t i o n s to these problems i n the format of a comprehensive management i n f o r m a t i o n system. 3.1 C o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n Problems and Model C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 3.1.1 The Beef P r o d u c t i o n C y c l e The nature of l i v e s t o c k b r e e d i n g and the beef c y c l e suggests t h a t three or more years should be c o n s i d e r e d . In a d d i t i o n the seasonal nature of l i v e s t o c k p r o d u c t i o n suggests t h a t f o u r f e e d i n g seasons must be allowed f o r . I t was decided t h a t a s i x p e r i o d unequal time dimension model would be a p p r o p r i a t e . The f i r s t year of the model i s broken down i n t o w i n t e r , s p r i n g , summer and f a l l and t h i s i s - 37 -followed by another two periods of one year each. Alterna-t i v e l y , i t may have been possible to break the second and t h i r d years down into quarters, but t h i s has the disadvantage of requiring more user input and a larger matrix. There i s a trade off between user time, the complexity of the input form and cost of solution. The time period structure of the model decided upon answers short term questions regarding the feeding cycle and buying and s e l l i n g of livestock i n the f i r s t year and i t also answers longer-term questions by incorporating the second and t h i r d years into the model. For example, a build-up of the herd over three years may be examined. 3.1.2 The Planning Horizon Some ranchers consider i t to be important to have f a i r l y d e t ailed plans for a planning horizon other than the three years as stipulated above. Through a recursive pro-gramming approach such needs may be catered to. The results from the f i r s t years solution would serve as a st a r t i n g point for the following period. For example, for those interested i n quarterly livestock and feed flows over 3 years, instead of only over one year, 3 separate user input forms would need to be completed and 3 solutions would be presented. The results of the f i r s t run would present d e t a i l s for the f i r s t 4 quarters i n addition to the second and t h i r d years. The l a t t e r would be ignored and only the f i r s t 4 quarters considered. A second run would present - 38 -re s u l t s for the next 4 quarters of the second year and a t h i r d run for the 4 quarters of the l a s t year. A three year plan on a quarterly basis i s the r e s u l t . Alterna-t i v e l y , i f less d e t a i l i s required 3 solutions on a recursive basis would present r e s u l t s for a 9 year planning horizon. 3.1.3 P a r t i a l Optimizations The bound l e v e l on any variable or set of variables may be free, fixed, set at a lower l e v e l or set at an upper l e v e l i n the model. I t therefore can be used as a descriptive/budgeting t o o l i f the l e v e l of most decision variables have already been predetermined or i t may be used as an optimization model where most decision variables are free and the objective function i s maximized subject to certain conditions. This f l e x a b i l i t y allows the user to test various optimization/budgeting combinations that are best suited to his/her p a r t i c u l a r problem or circumstances. Options that have been allowed for i n the input form and matrix generator include: (1) Descriptive/Budgeting Option: set of predetermined decisions are budgeted for. (2) Optimization Option: Feeding, crop and livestock plans are maximized over the time horizon subject to the opening set of resources and subject to fixed cash requirements for l i v i n g . (3) P a r t i a l Optimization Option: Livestock numbers are predetermined by the rancher. He may - 39 -determine the best feeding/crop plan given t h i s decision. (4) P a r t i a l Optimization Option: Feed production given. The best livestock plan i s to be determined given the feed producing and graz-ing capacity of the land and a given l e v e l of feed purchases. The opening set of resources and l i v i n g expenses are also considered. (5) Research Option: The bound levels of certa i n variables or sets of variables i n the matrix are predefined as required. The amount of user input required for each of the above options varies, the budgeting mode requiring the most and the optimization mode the least . 3,1.4 Methods of Dealing With Y i e l d & Price &  Seasonal V a r i a b i l i t y The time horizon of the model i s three years. This requires a projection of future crop y i e l d s , livestock weights, prices, the length of the winter feeding and so forth. These parameters are user s p e c i f i e d and consequently t h e i r expectations may be based on forecasts, on past p r o b a b i l i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n s or on subjective p r o b a b i l i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n s . Given a d i s t r i b u t i o n for these parameters i t i s feasible to consider several alternatives, for example, the most l i k e l y outcome, the best outcome, the worst or some other combination. - 40 -The length of winter feeding and the s t a r t thereof varies by geographical location and from year to year. Like-wise, the spring, summer and f a l l grazing periods w i l l vary. Weather conditions also a f f e c t the weight at which calves or yearlings come o f f the summer range and weather also affects crop and hay y i e l d s . The length of the winter feed-ing period, the weight of animals and crop y i e l d s and .prices s p e c i f i e d by the user and hence a rancher may wish to specify ce r t a i n conditions and budget or optimize for these given conditions. 3.1.5 The Fina n c i a l Year Versus Crop/Livestock  Production Year The crop/livestock year for most ranches does not generally coincide with t h e i r f i n a n c i a l year. Balance sheets are generally presented as of December 31st and income state-ments are prepared showing expenses and receipts for the year ending December 31st. On the other hand the livestock/crop year for the model has been chosen to s t a r t at the beginning of winter feeding and at the end of the f a l l season approxi-mately two months p r i o r to the beginning of the f i n a n c i a l year. Therefore, the time period accounted for i s actually three years plus approximately two months of winter feeding p r i o r to January 1st. This approach was taken because the livestock count a f t e r f a l l sales i s l i k e l y to be the most accurate and the stocks of winter feed on hand are known f a i r l y accurately. The balance sheets prepared at the end of the year serve as opening balances for the next f i n a n c i a l - 41 -year. A l l physical input data required from the user i s therefore based on a crop/livestock year and f i n a n c i a l information on the f i n a n c i a l year. Cash flows are on a monthly basis for the f i r s t year and on an annual basis for the l a s t two years of the model. The model incorporates the interdependance between liv e s t o c k numbers, t h e i r feed require-ments and the cash flows associated with these variables. 3.1.6 Ration Formulae Total d i g e s t i b l e nutrients, metabolizable energy and other measures of the feeding value of a feed are commonly used i n ration formulation. Ranchers are generally familiar with ration s p e c i f i c a t i o n s and i n certain instances they may formulate rations which meet certa i n standards at minimum cost. More commonly winter: rations consist of a certain number of pounds of roughage plus pounds of grain and these rations are fed over the winter season. Maintenance of animal weight i s required and the.level of feeding i s adjusted accordingly. The model sp e c i f i e s ration formulae on a poundage basis and consequently s i m p l i f i e s input requirements by avoiding the problem of converting grains, hay and other feeds into nutrient unit equivalents not commonly used by ranchers. The above discussion has presented the main character-i s t i c s and options considered i n constructing the beef management information system. Further d e t a i l s of the matrix structure, the model and a d e f i n i t i o n of a c t i v i t i e s and t h e i r c o e f f i c i e n t s follows. - 42 -3.2 The Matrix Structure of the Model The following general overview of the empirical model i l l u s t r a t e s the int e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s between subgroups of a c t i v i t i e s and t h e i r control rows. The beef model matrix i s presented i n Figure 3.1. To aid. the reader i n following the model's l o g i c , an abbreviated form of Figure 3.1 i s presented in Appendix IV. The l a t t e r figure concerns the f i r s t quarter of year one. Consequently the reader may apply the lo g i c to be discussed i n t h i s section to the f i r s t quarter of year one only, since the remaining quarters of year 1 and the following two years are constructed i n the same manner. 3.2.1 The Feed Production Sector In Figure 3.1, feed supplies are subgrouped into two major c a t e g o r i e s — g r a z i n g animal, .unit months and crops or hay which i s produced i n the growing season and stored for feeding at a l a t e r period. Feed supplies grown i n summer are fed the following f a l l or winter period. The model sta r t s at the beginning of the winter feeding, year 1. > Spring, summer and f a l l grazing i s accounted for i n the time period during which i t becomes available. Feed inventory supplies produced during the summer season are fed over the winter period, t h i s period generally s t a r t i n g i n November and ending i n A p r i l or May of the following year. The f i r s t four rowsets of submatrices of Figure 3.1 accumulate feed supplies and allow for t h e i r transfer to feeding a c t i v i t i e s . Submatrices A„ and A 0 _ allow for grazing of - 43 -LAST WINTER CONSTRAINTS O B J E C T I V E FUNCTION Yc.ir 1: N u t r i e n t Supply L a s t Crop Year Year 2: N u t r i e n t Supply Crop Year 1 Year 3; N u t r i e n t S u p p l / Crop Year 2 Year 4: N u t r i e n t Supply Crop Year 3 Year 1: Winter N u t r i e n t C o n t r o l Year 1: S p r i n g N u t r i e n t C o n t r o l Year 1: Suamer N u t r i e n t C o n t r o l Year 1: F a l l K u t r l e n t C o n t r o l Yr. 1: Winter C a t t l e C o n t r o l Yr. .1: S p r i n g C a t t l e C o n t r o l Yr. 1: Summer C a t t l e C o n t r o l Yr. 1: F a l l C a t t l e C o n t r o l Yr. 2: C a t t l e C o n t r o l Y r . 3: C i t t l e C o n t r o l Yr. 1: Cash C o n t r o l Yr. 2; Cauh C o n t r o l Yr. 3: C i s h C o n t r o l o i : . - I X3 +1 -1 °5.2 *».* t t YFAR 2 YF.A* 3 V « o. a. o ^r, <\ o 1 u -a u n r J | a «J •fl <u 1 i U 13 u i : •as. n •3.1 U P A : 5 , a A 6 , U A;,io Jill. ;s.io 6,1] 24.1'. NOTTi Sec I-cju-nd on la«t p.is« of F l j u r o 1. - 44 -flKliaP. 3.1 (Cont'd.) COKSTRAINYS OBJf.CTIVt. FUSCTION 3 -ft. «1 d. >-o "1.16 i.wi l .n as TOTAL FEEO S L T P l t I S YR. I UII.TKR CAVTLB T«. 1 S3 -1.17 o > S 3 Teat 1: Mt . t r l c n t Supply L a s t Crop Tear Year 2! N u t r i e n t Supply Crop Y e a r I Yeaf 3: N u t r i e n t Supply Crop Y e a r 2 fear 4; N u t r i e n t Supply Crop Year 3 Tear I t W i n t e r M u t r l a n t C o n t r o l Year I t S p r i n g N u t r i e n t C o n t r o l Year It Sunjcer N u t r i e n t C o n t r o l Year I t F a l l S u t ' r l e n t C o n t r o l Y r . I t U l n t e r ' C a t t l e C o n t r o l Y r . It S p r i n g C a t t l e C o n t r o l Y r . I : Sufiwer C a t t l e C o n t r o l Y r . I : F a l l C a t t l e C o n t r o l Y r . 2: C a t t l e C o n t r o l Y r . 3s C x t t l e C o n t r o l Y r . I : Cash C o n t r o l Y r . 2t Cash C o n t r o l Y r . 3i Cn«h C o n t r o l BOKtBS 2,21 " 3 , U 9,20 3.21 2.22 "3.22 '26.j(1 A 1 0 28 *II 28 B12.22l '13,22 'l6.2« '17.2* 18.25 n * 1 I n * 1 U . 2 t j "l»,27j 3 H , 2 8 | .-1 ,:.n|*24.2> - 45 -yicnye I.ICCQOKM.) S p r i n g C a t t l e T r . 1 Suwctff C a t t l e T r . 1 -< > a — P . t l l C i t t l r T r . 1 C a . t t U T r . 2 -• > n a - i £3 t* a *• > O B J E C T I V E F U N C T I O N T e a r 1: N u t r i e n t Supp ly L a s t Crop Tear Y e a r 2 : N u t r i e n t S u p p l y Crop Y e a r 1 T e a r 3 : N u t r i e n t Supp ly Crop Tear 2 u _ _ _ Year i s N u t r i e n t S u p p l y Crop Y e a r 3 T e a r 1: W i n t e r N u t r i e n t C o n t r o l Tear 1: S p r i n g N u t r i e n t C o n t r o l Tear 1: Susmer N u t r i e n t C o n t r o l T e a r I : F * U S u t r i e n e C o n t r o l T r . I : W i n t e r C a t t l e C o n t r o l T r . 1: S p r i n g C a t t l e C o n t r o l T r . 1: Summer C a t t l e C o n t r o l t r , 3: C a t t l e C o n t r o l T r . I : Cach C o n t r o l 1 1,29 "1,33 U I , 3 7 c"1 i-c*1 Y r . . 2 : Ca»i» C o n t r o l T r . 1; C i u h C o n t r o l *5,38 *12 11 A 1 3 K14,35 k + 1 15 ,35 L l«.38 '17, 3» 19,2! l 19,30 T i . 1: F a l l C a t t l e C o n t r o l Y r . 2 : Cat t - le C o n t r o l J 19 ,31 ,-1 J 2 0 , 3 2 l 2 0 , 3 1 j . 1 , 3 4 A " 1 22 ,3S B 2 2 . 3 S ! D 2 2 . « 24 ,29 r 1 24,30 X*1 24,36 24.37 22.41 '23.41 23 ,42 9 , 4 * 3+ l 3 2 J , « J 23 ,44 2>,4' 26 ,42 - 46 -rig.it 3,1 (Cont'd.) CONSTRAINTS Livestock Expena.. Cash nctlvltle. Tear 1 - 5 Ca.li Tr. 2 c c if O B J E C T I V E FUNCTION 7.43 '1,46 1.47 Tear 1: Nutrleat Supply tact Crop Tear Tear 2: Nutrient Supply Crop Tear 1 Tear 3: Nutrient Supply Crop Tear 2 Ttar 4: Nutrient Supply Crop Tear 3 Tear 1: Winter Nutrient Control Tear 1: Spring Nutrient Control Tear 1: Sueeer Nutrient Control Tear 1: Fall Nutrient Control Tr. 1: Vlnter Cattle Control Tr. 1: Spring Cattle Control Tr. 1: Summer Cattle Control Tr. 1: fall Cattle Control Tr. 2: Cattle Control Tr. 3: Cattle Control Tr. 1: Cash Control +1 24,45 Tr. 2: Cash Control Tr. 3: Cash Control D-1 24.48 °24,49 24,50 «!»«.» -1 D2J,50 ^•i • D25.SliB21,S2 24,53 4.5 26,55 26.54 25.57 ! °23J. )*1  23.5* - 47 -T1CVVX 3.1(Cont'd.l CONSTRAINTS O B J E C T I V E F U N C T I O N Tear 1: Nutrient Supply Laat Crop Tear Tear 2: Nutrient Supply Crop Tear 1 Tear 3: Nutrient Supply Crop Tear 2 Tear 4t Nutrient Supply Crop Tear 3 Tear 1: Winter Nutrient Control Tear 1: Sprint Nutrleat Control Tear 1: Sooner Nutrleat Control Tear 1: Pall Nutrient Control Tr. 1: Winter Cattle Control Tr. 1: Spring Cattle Control Tr. 1: Suaaer Cattle Control Tr. 1: f a l l Cattle Control Tr. 2: Cattle Control Tr. 3: Cattle Control Tr. 1: Cash Control Tr. 2: Cash Control Tr. 3: Caah Control BO IJiCS "1.60: CAS8 T«. 3 '1.61 '1.62 26.6; 0-» 26,62 1° aO <0 *0 L E G E N D : (Superscripts, vnen ahom, represents t a only types of non-taro eleaarata l a a am •at r i a ) ~" " " A l a a general eubaatrti «lth so * !« * atruetural bound n e t s * C i a a row auboatrlx or v a c u * D la a diagonal •ubaacrl* i noo-asro o l a - 48 -of a rancher's own range and crown or leased range. The t o t a l quantity of grazing available i n each of the four quarters i s summarized through the accounting variables, submatrix 2 ^ t o submatrix 2^, a n c^ th i s quantity i s transferred down and made available to livestock through submatrices D 1 ( )^ 2 1, D ^ ^ , and D 1 6 > 2 4 . Feed supplies and hay stocks on hand at the st a r t of the winter period p r i o r to the f i r s t year of the model are also available for feeding i n the f i r s t year. These stocks are consumed through the f i r s t winter and are accounted for i n submatrix A_ ,. This feed on hand represents 3,1 crop and hay production grown p r i o r to the st a r t of the model's f i r s t period. The range (grazing animal unit months) of the second year (submatrices A. and A. Q) i s used to' feed animals for that year. These requirements are accounted for by sub-matrices A. for grazing and A_ ., for hay and feed grain 4,41 ^ 7 , 4 1 ^ 2 ^ requirements. Additional hay or grain requirements pur-chased during the f i r s t year may either be fed during the f i r s t winter or carr i e d over to the next winter. For example, hay purchases during February are l i k e l y to be fed during the f i r s t winter whereas purchases during November of the f i r s t year are l i k e l y to be fed during the second winter period accounted for i n the model (submatrix A_ O D ) . The feed transfer a c t i v i t i e s D 0 „ and D r „ allow for t h i s 3 , z D , z a l t e r n a t i v e . - 49 -Crop sales made during the f i r s t account year (sub-matrix A_. , 0) w i l l draw from supplies available for feeding. These sales w i l l reduce nutrient supplies i n the second year, that i s , crop production takes place during summer i n the f i r s t year, sales generally occur i n the f a l l or afte r the s t a r t of the second winter season and consequently nutrient supplies i n the second winter are decreased. Total grazing supplies i n the f i r s t year are accumulated on a quarterly basis i n the f i r s t year through 21 t o D2 24 and hay or grain supplies are available for transfer to winter and/or spring and/or summer and/or f a l l feeding, although generally winter feeding i s practiced. Beginning feed inventories during the f i r s t winter of the model are transferred down through submatrices D^g ^ a n c^ 21' a n c ^ are consumed by animals over winter. Animal requirements are presented i n submatrix A,, O Q . The requirements are 11 , z. o based upon clos i n g livestock numbers at the end of winter shown as D l g 2g« S i m i l a r l y the second winter's feed supply i s transferred down by D,, „„ and D,_ „.. The second 16,24 17,24 year's crop of hay i s accounted for by submatrix A _ and A^ and i s u t i l i z e d i n submatrix A^ S i m i l a r l y the t h i r d year's harvest i s accounted for i n submatrix A n ,„ and Ag ^ and i s consumed i n submatrix Ag 3.2.2 Animal Production Sector A c t i v i t i e s i n the matrix such as opening stocks, buying, s e l l i n g and deaths of livestock are controlled by - 50 -18th to the 2 3rd rowset of submatrices. Opening livestock numbers at the beginning of winter are accounted for through submatrix D, 0 o c . Animals purchased during the winter period l o , ZD add to these numbers (submatrix D^g 2^) sales decrease the numbers (submatrix D^g 2^) a n <^ t n e closing count at the end of the winter period i s then determined (submatrix D^g 2 g ) . The closing balance i s transferred down as the opening acount for the beginning of the spring season through submatrix A,_ During the spring season purchases may occur j. y / <£ o (D,o O Q)/ sales may take place (D,n and the closing xy,^y i y, J u balance i s once again determined (D^ y 3 ^ ) . During the trans-fer of the closing balance of spring to the opening balance of summer livestock age and category changes are accounted for through submatrix A^^ Feed supplies for the spring feeding period are made available through submatrices D^2 2 2 and D ^ 2 2 a n d the animal requirements for t h i s period are given by submatrices A12 31 a n c ^ A13 31* i a ^ e r *-wo submatrices are t i e d i n with the spring closing l i v e s t o c k number count through sub-matrix Dn_ . The same cycle i s repeated i n the summer and f a l l seasons. During the second and t h i r d years of the model the livestock flows are on an annual basis and hence only annual purchases, sales and cl o s i n g numbers are given. Sub-matrix A 2 2 i s constructed so that the f a l l c losing livestock numbers of year 1 are aged as they transfer into year 2 of the model. The closing livestock numbers at the - 51 -end of the second year are given by submatrix D 2 2 4 1 , and those at the end of the t h i r d year by submatrix D,^ 44 The submatrices for feed supplies for these two years were discussed previously and hence the second rowset of sub-matrices to the twenty-third rowset i n c l u s i v e deal with feed flows and animal flows. As mentioned previously, the flows for the f i r s t year are controlled on a quarterly basis and those of the other two years on an annual basis. 3.2.3 The F i n a n c i a l Sector Closely associated with feed and livestock flows are cash flow rows and the objective function row of the model. The objective function maximizes p r o f i t subject to certain r e s t r i c t i o n s . P r o f i t i s defined as t o t a l revenue minus t o t a l costs. Costs do not include i n t e r e s t on c a p i t a l and a return to management or depreciation, although returns to management are allowed for i n the form of owner's cash withdrawals. A c t i v i t i e s that bring cash into the firm are allowed for i n the objective function and i n the aash flow rows and cash expenses are likewise accounted f o r . Cash flows during the f i r s t year are accounted for on a monthly basis, those during the second and t h i r d years on an annual basis. Overhead and variable cash expenses are considered. Submatrices C, . , C, ,- and C, , account for the 1,4 1/5 1 / 0 expenses incurred i n feed production i n the f i r s t year, these are negative c o e f f i c i e n t s i n the objective function. Crop expenses are accounted for by C, . for own crop - 52 -land and C, , for leased crop land and leased range i s I/O allowed for by submatrix 5 . The cash flows incurred by these a c t i v i t i e s are allowed for by submatrices A^^ ^ , A_. r and A_ . The same flows are allowed for i n the 24,5 24,6 second and t h i r d years by submatrices g to and A o c o t o A o-7 i A • Feed and crop supplies may be supplemented through additional purchases when necessary (C^ 1 5 , C, ,_ and A_. , c , A_c , ,, A„ , , _) and any crop or feed 1,17 24,15 25,16 2 6,17 sales w i l l add to the p r o f i t (C 1 1 8 , C 1 i g and 2 Q ) or add to the cash flows ( A 24 i s ' A25 19 a n c^ A2 6 20^ """n t* i e appropriate time period. Purchases and sales of livestock also are considered. Purchases i n any of the time periods are entered into the objective function ( C ^ g , C ^ 2 Q , C ^ ^ , C ^ 3 6 , and 4 2 ) as expenses and these animal purchases also require cash (submatrices A 2 4 2^, A 2 4 2 9 , e t c . ) . Livestock sales are s i m i l a r l y treated. Other variable livestock expenses are accounted for i n submatrices C, . - t o C, .-.and A„. . c 1,4s 1/47 24,45 t 0 A26,47' Other cash flows are allowed for i n submatrices D24,49 t 0 °24,54 i n t h e f i r S t y e a r ' D25,55 t 0 °25,59 i n t h e second year and D„, to D„, i n the t h i r d year. The 26,61 26,64 closing balance on hand at the end of one period i s trans-ferred down to the next period. Short-term operating loans are negotiated whenever the cash balance f a l l s below zero. These loans are accounted for i n the objective function through submatrices C 1 5 1 , 5 g and C 1 6 1 and i n the cash - 53 -flow rows through submatrices D_. r, and D „ r c, i n the f i r s t . 24 , b l z b , b ± year, through the s e c o n d year and through D2(, i n the t h i r d year. To s i m p l i f y these borrowing a c t i v i t i e s loans are n e g o t i a t e d f o r one time p e r i o d o n l y and i f neces-sary another loan w i l l be r e n e g o t i a t e d f o r the f o l l o w i n g time p e r i o d . Longer term loans at lower i n t e r e s t r a t e s are a l s o allowed f o r . The bound l e v e l s f o r d i f f e r e n t a c t i v i t i e s or s e t s of a c t i v i t i e s may be s e t f r e e at an upper l e v e l , a lower l e v e l or f i x e d . The a p p r o r p i a t e c h o i c e w i l l depend upon whether the l e v e l o f t h a t v a r i a b l e or s e t of v a r i a b l e s i s to be op t i m i z e d or whether the l e v e l has been predetermined. I t was noted t h a t f i v e a l t e r n a t i v e o p t i o n s were allowed f o r : (1) a d e s c r i p t i v e / b u d g e t i n g o p t i o n where the l e v e l of many v a r i a b l e s have been predetermined; (2) an o p t i m i z a t i o n mode where the l e v e l of most v a r i a b l e s i s determined w i t h i n the model; (3) two p a r t i a l o p t i m i z a t i o n models where c e r t a i n l e v e l s have been predetermined and others are f r e e ; (4) a r e s e a r c h o p t i o n where some v a r i a b l e s are predetermined and o t h e r are f r e e . The bound l e v e l s shown i n F i g u r e 3.1 are f o r the d e s c r i p t i v e / budgeting o p t i o n . T h i s g e n e r a l overview o u t l i n e s the b a s i c s t r u c t u r e of the model and i s intended t o i l l u s t r a t e the r e l a t i o n s h i p between groups and sub-groups of a c t i v i t i e s and rows. A more d e t a i l e d understanding of the model may be - 54 -obtained i f i n d i v i d u a l a c t i v i t i e s , rows and t h e i r elements are t r a c e d out as presented i n s e c t i o n 3.4. 3.3 The Base Ranch S i t u a t i o n In the summer of 1975, the beef farm management package was t e s t e d on v a r i o u s ranch s i t u a t i o n s and v a l i d a t e d . Ten cow-calf, cow-yearling ranchers i n the c e n t r a l I n t e r i o r of B.C. cooperated i n u s i n g the beef model f o r t h e i r farm and t h i s allowed f o r an e v a l u a t i o n of the model and i t s format. Presented i n Table 3.1 i s a summary of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of these ranches. The r e p o r t s generated by the model were re t u r n e d t o those concerned and t h e i r r e a c t i o n s , c r i t i c i s m s and suggestions were noted. Much of the i n f o r m a t i o n obtained from the p a r t i c i p a t i n g ranchers was of a c o n f i d e n t i a l nature and agreement was reached t h a t t h e i r farm r e p o r t s would not be p u b l i s h e d . However, i n examining these ten ranch s i t u a -t i o n s , t h e i r management p r a c t i c e s and t h e i r problems, a h y p o t h e t i c a l ranch named "The Base Ranch" was formulated u s i n g some of the a c t u a l data from the ten t e s t ranches. The f o r m u l a t i o n o f the Base Ranch was f u r t h e r supplemented by data o b t a i n e d from the B.C. Farm Income Assurance Program f o r Beef Producers. The Base Ranch s i t u a t i o n i s a cow-calf, cow-yearling o p e r a t i o n , s e l l i n g weaned c a l v e s i n f a l l and i n a d d i t i o n w i n t e r i n g c a l v e s which are then ranged through a second summer and s o l d as long y e a r l i n g f e e d e r s . The g o a l of the rancher i s to produce the g r e a t e s t p o s s i b l e number of c a l v e s , Table 3.1 Characteristics of Test Ranches Test Ranch Nvrber 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Type of Ranch Operation Cow Calf/ Cow Yearling Cow Yeariir.g Cow Calf Cow Yearling Cow Calf Cow Calf Ccv Calf Cow Calf Cow Calf/ Cow Yearling Cow Yearling Norber of Cows 130 205 150 264 58 72 65 102 49 156 Ninber of Acres in Production 103 420 350 232 205 150 475 200 80 156 Type of Crop Crown Mixed Hay Mixed Hay Cereal Hay Oats 3arley Mixed Hay Alfalfa Hay Com Silage Cereal Silage Gracs Hay Mixed Hay Cereal Hay Crass Hay Mixed Hay Oats Barley Mixed Hay Mixed Hay Alfalfa Hay Cereal Hay Oats Barley Total Assets ('000) 320 240 780 441 183 205 337 224 218 110 - 56 -with the heaviest possible weaning weights at the lowest possible cost. The management practices for the Base Ranch through the calendar year would generally be as follows. Cows st a r t calving i n early March such that the calves w i l l be large enough to take the increased milk when cows are turned out to spring pasture. In addition, early calving re s u l t s i n heavier calves i n the f a l l s e l l i n g period. Calv-ing i s labour demanding, the manager must be on hand to a s s i s t young cows that are having d i f f i c u l t y i n calving. After one month male calves are castrated, and a l l calves are dehorned, inoculated and branded. In May cows are on home pasture and b u l l s are turned i n with them. Winter holding barns are usually cleaned at t h i s time. Cattle are turned out on to range June 1. The f i r s t cut of hay i s harvested at about the end of June and the second cut about the end of August. By September c a t t l e are back home and grazing on stubble. Calves are weaned and approximately 60% of them are sold during October. Yearling feeders are also sold. C u l l s from the cow herd are i d e n t i f i e d and sold. Winter feeding usually starts i n early November and continues to March. A very s i m p l i f i e d calendar year i s consequently completed. The f i r s t solution of the model using the data of the representative ranch was of a descriptive/budgeting nature. Restraining the model to solve as a descriptive budgeting t o o l i s referred to i n the input form as Option 1. Using t h i s option the farm manager must complete a l l the - 57 -input form tables shown i n Appendix I. The model i s there-fore r e s t r i c t e d to those a c t i v i t i e s as determined by the farm manager. Informtion required to use Option 1 of the model may be broken down into basic data pertaining to feed, livestock and finance. A summary of these data needs i s given i n Table 3.2, these data requirements are categorized i n more d e t a i l as shown i n the input form i n Appendix I. Table 3.2 Summary of Data Requirements i n Descriptive' Budgeting Procedure Feed Data Livestock Data - Amount and value of inventory - Amount and value of inventory - Yields and acreage grown for 3 crop years - Sales and purchases for 3 years - Range available for 3 years - Total livestock expenses on an annual basis - Composition of winter rations for 4 winter periods - Crop Sales and purchases for 3 years - Total crop production expenses on an annual basis - Measures of livestock performance Fi n a n c i a l Data - Monthly account of cash flows for Year 1 - Starting periods balance sheet - Market values of fixed assets - Changes i n fixed asset position for 3 years - 58 -Although completion of the input form for option 1 of the model may be the most time consuming, the output gener-ated may be the most useful i n obtaining user acceptance. Due to the constraining e f f e c t of the descriptive/budgeting procedure, the output generated by the model corresponds d i r e c t l y to the information provided by the farm manager. In other words the model i s not free to select a global optimum, but only to budget according to the farmer's decisions. This procedure i s considered to be important i n preparing the farm manager for any further experimentation with the model for i f the generated reports do not correspond to his budgeted r e s u l t s the discrepancy may be traced to inaccurate data input or a l t e r n a t i v e l y to inaccurate model re s u l t s . One therefore establishes an understanding with the farmer that i f he wrongly s p e c i f i e s the input, r e s u l t s w i l l usually not be to his expectations. Once a l e v e l of confidence has been established through the d e s c r i p t i v e / budgeting procedure, other alternatives may be analyzed. The Base Ranch s i t u a t i o n , the a c t i v i t i e s to be considered, the c o e f f i c i e n t s of the Base Ranch as s p e c i f i e d i n the model and the manner i n which the input form and matrix structure are related w i l l be presented i n the sections that follow. The matrix e s s e n t i a l l y consists of three main components, the feed component, the liv e s t o c k component and the f i n a n c i a l component and the i n d i v i d u a l a c t i v i t i e s of the model as they relate to these components are presented. - 59 -3.4 D e t a i l e d D e s c r i p t i o n of S e l e c t e d Submatrices The i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s between the i n p u t form, the matrix generator and the matrix w i l l be i n d i c a t e d i n t h i s s e c t i o n . A t t e n t i o n i s given to s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t i e s i n the model as they r e l a t e d to the feed, l i v e s t o c k o r f i n a n c i a l components of the model. 3.4.1 Feed Submatrices D e s c r i p t i o n The f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n w i l l d i s c u s s i n d e t a i l the elements of the matrix s p e c i f i c a l l y concerned with growing crops and wint e r f e e d i n g i n year 1 of the beef model. An attempt i s made to e x p l a i n how the i n f o r m a t i o n i n the Base Ranch's i n p u t form presented i n Appendix I i s a s s i m i l a t e d v i a a matrix generator and subsequently entered i n t o the model. The reader may wish to r e f e r t o Appendix IV which d e t a i l s f e e d i n g d u r i n g the f i r s t w i n t e r p e r i o d and use i t as v i s u a l a i d . The crop and haying a c t i v i t i e s accounted f o r i n the model a l l o w f o r 12 d i f f e r e n t c a t e g o r i e s as presented i n Table 3.3. These feed p r o d u c t i o n a c t i v i t i e s may take p l a c e on e i t h e r owned or rented land. I n v e n t o r i e s on hand a t the s t a r t of the w i n t e r f e e d i n g p e r i o d (12 items) are a l s o c o n s i d e r e d . Mixed hay was the onl y crop produced i n the Base Ranch s i t u a t i o n ; 245 acres b e i n g hayed w i t h an average t o t a l y i e l d o f 3 to n s / a c r e over two c u t s . Hay produced o r any of the other crops w i l l be fed or s o l d d u r i n g some f u t u r e p e r i o d . Table 3.4 i s a b s t r a c t e d from Table 3.3 - Crop and Range A c t i v i t i e s Year 1 (Abstracted from Table 4 i n Appendix 1) Crop and Teed Description Grass Hay Alfalfa Hay Mixed Hay Cereal Hay Mixed Silap.e Com Silage Cereal Silage Oats Parley Feed Wheat Other 1. Other 2i 1.151 1.161 1.171 1.181 Winter R  Sprinft R  Sutrner R Fal l R First Year's Harvest Own Land Acres it Total Yield/Ac. it Thlta" Tons Tons Tons Tons Tons Tons Tons Bu. Bu. Bu. Covemment Ranee A.U.M. XI /fOO $/A.U.M. i l 62 Leased Land Total Acres II to Yield/Ac. 3 Feed cn Hand Last Year as of Start of Winter Feeding Plus Anticipated Purchases Before Dec. 31 Tons ' II 15/TcnJ 7SS -70 • Z7 - 61 -Table 11 and 12 of the Input Form to allow for these sales and i n addition crop purchases, i f necessary, may be made. Table 3 . 4 Feed Purchased and Sold i n Year 1 (Abstracted from Table 11- and 12 i n Appendix 1) Type of Feed Purchased Arrcuvt Purchased (Tons) i i Purchase \ Price <$/Tcn> JI Grass Hay Alfalfa Hav Mixed Hay 5 0 73" Cereal Hay Mixed Silage Cam Silap.e Cereal Silage Oats Barley CO f/O Feed Wheat Other 1. Other 2. Protein Suppl. Other 3. type of Crop Sold tort. Sal3 Sold Price i i(Tans) U$/Tcn) Grass Hay <YU.il fa Hay !'Mixed Hay 1 Cereal Hay Mixed Silar.e Com Silap.a Oareal Silap.a Oats Barley Feed Wheat Other 1. Other 2. Grazing on home or leased range i s also treated on a quarterly basis i n Table 3 . 3 . The Base Ranch s i t u a t i o n has a v a i l a b l e 1400 A.U.M.'s of grazing costing $0.62 per A. U . M. - 62 -A c t i v i t i e s i n the model correspond to the 12 cropping a c t i v i t i e s defined i n Table 3.3 and Table 3.4. The a... 1 ] 's c o e f f i c i e n t s for these a c t i v i t i e s and the manner i n which these feeding a c t i v i t i e s are related to livestock require-ments are presented i n Figure 3.2. From Figure 3.2 i t i s apparent that mixed hay and barley are accounted for i n the opening stocks of feed at a fixed l e v e l (755 tons and 27 tons for mixed hay and barley r e s p e c t i v e l y ) . These leve l s are sp e c i f i e d i n the input form (Table 3.3). When converted to pounds the open-ing stock values of feed enter the matrix as a negative a..; 1 3 value of 2000. The negative sign being i n agreement with conventional L.P. model construction i n d i c a t i n g a resources supply. The feed transfer a c t i v i t y i s used as an account-ing device to accumulate the f i r s t year's harvest for hay and transfer i t to the f i r s t year's hay supply, 2 05 acres of mixed hay are grown with a y i e l d (total cuts) of 3 tons per acre. Consequently an a^ _. value of 6000 l b s . i s entered, under the a c t i v i t y mixed hay. Leased range enters the matrix at a fixed l e v e l . The units are animal unit months (A.U.M.) where an A.U.M. i s defined as grazing one cow and her c a l f , b u l l or other mature animal for a period of one month. Summer range i s the only period during which range i s used and i t enters the matrix at a maximum le v e l of 1400 A.U.M. (see Table 3.3). Mixed hay i s also grown on leased land. «: It d> i H* o c H* n rt 3 n- n ti-1 H-ro O » 1 ^ 3 rt ra P •< M •< O • o •a re P 3-re n to 2 re re a. s • P ID O 1 rt CJ 3" w ro P o o ra DC H- Ci 5 p n X ra O in re t— re to a * cn ti re Q. s: to ts . a: M • • • ™ • • • a: p P P •< s: ACTIVITIES M o o K> I J U l ' / i c o o o| t-l Mixed Hay Barley Mixed Hay Mixed Hay Sunur.er Mixed Kay in O 8 § * 3 o Transfer P 3 (9 P Mixed Kay Barley Mixed Hay Purchased Sole Mixed Hay Barjey S ^  o 3 rr rr p re M i Cows Heifer Calves Steer Calves Bred Heifers Yearling Heifers B u l l s O »-» * P H- to 3 F-rt 3 re ua i r < Q *1 t( - e9 -- 64 -During year 1, mixed hay and barley were purchased (Table 3.4). It was s p e c i f i e d that 30 tons of mixed hay and 6 0 tons of barley were to be purchased. These enter as lower bounds and consequently i f the farm manager under-estimates his needs for feed during the winter, the model has the f l e x i b i l i t y of purchasing additional requirements. Sales of feed are entered as fixed bounds; 20 tons of mixed hay were sold. The matrix value i n t h i s case being a p o s i t i v e 2000, i n d i c a t i n g a resource use. The t o t a l feed supply w i l l now be u t i l i z e d . I t can be seen from Figure 3.2 that a cow requires 3240 l b s . of mixed hay for the winter feeding period. This a^ .. value i s calculated i n the following manner. Referring to Table 3.5 four rations composed of mixed hay and barley are s p e c i f i e d . These rations w i l l vary according to the nutrient requirements of d i f f e r e n t classes of animals. Only 5 d i f f e r e n t rations have been allowed for i n the input form. Additional rations, i f required, are e a s i l y catered for. Table 3.6 s p e c i f i e s how rations are fed to the d i f f e r e n t livestock classes for a s p e c i f i e d number of days. For example, cows require 18 lbs. of mixed hay for 180 days of winter feeding. The matrix generator m u l t i p l i e s 18 lbs.'/day x 180 days and enters an a^ _. value of 3240 i n the appropriate row and column as shown i n Figure 3.2. This method applies to a l l remaining livestock classes. - 65 Table 3.5. Ration Composition Specified for Base Ranch. (Abstracted from Table 7 i n Appendix 1) Description of Feed in Ration Paticn 1 i I Ration 2 Raticn 3 Ration 4 Ration 5 S ! Grass Kay Alfalfa Hav Mixed Hay Cereal Hay ; •' Mixed Silage Com Silage Cereal Silage • •• Data . . . ; Barley 3 Tend Wheat •' Other 1 . Other 2 . Protein S U O D . Other 3 . ' . .. . The l o g i c and computational procedures of the matrix generator for the remaining quarters of year 1 and sub-sequent years i s s i m i l a r to the procedure out l i n e d above. '3*4.2 Animal Submatrices Description One of the key concepts of the beef model i s the aging of l i v e s t o c k as they grow. Once a year between spring and summer animals are transferred from one class to another. Ten • l i v e s t o c k c l a s s e s are allowed f o r . The submatrices. of the model t h a t account f o r t h i s t r a n s f e r as w e l l as purchases - 66 -Table 3 . 6 . Winter Feeding Schedule for D i f f e r e n t Livestock Classes for Specified Ration. (Abstracted from Table 8 i n Appendix 1) Aninul Class Haticn i j Nurrber 8 1 L a 3 t Year's Winter Cdws / Cows Cows ilzi. Calves . •JL / ? o lior. Calves 'Kef. Calves Str. Calves 2. / 5* O Str. Calves Srr. Calves bixi. iiet. / SrvJ. Her. Bi\l. Her. Yr. Iter. Yr. Hot. Yr. He i . Vr. Strs. Yr. Srrs. Yr. Strs. Sulla ' Bulls Bulls Yr. T^rs. Yr. Fdrs. Yr. Fdrs. i Yr. fdrs. 2 Yr. Fdrs. 2 Yr. 'Fdrs. and sales are D i g^ 3 1, A ^ ^ , D 2 0 / 3 2 ' D 2 0 , 3 3 ' D 2 0 , 3 4 ' D o o ->c and A „ , Presented i n Table 3 . 7 i s an account of the number and type of animals sold during year 1 . In addition, the number of liv e s t o c k sold during the summer months are shown. Note only y e a r l i n g steers and c u l l s were s o l d d u r i n g the summer months. In Table 3.8 i n f o r m a t i o n on c a l f crop.,' c u l l i n g r a t e s and oth e r m i s c e l l a n e o u s • i n format ion - 67 -Table 3.7. L i v e s t o c k Sales and Losses Aninal Class Total Ko.Hd. Sold i I Avg. Wt. (lb.) ii Sale Price C$/lb) SI Ko. Died Yr. 1 21 June XI July 31 Aug. Cows r!ef. Calves HOO .£9. Str. Calves ?7 • 3? Bred. .Rep. Hef. Yr. Hef. 30 •?7S . 2 ? Yr. Strs. 60 • Eulls V /zoo . .Z3 Yr. Fdrs. 2 Yr. Fdrs. Culls 3C> fOGO • * Table 3.8. M i s c e l l a n e o u s L i v e s t o c k Information CALF CROP: COWS = NO. CALVES WEANED/NO. COWS EXPOSED TO BULLS CALF CROP: BRED HEIFERS = NO. CALVES WEANED/NO. HEIFERS EXPOSED TO BULLS REPLACEMENT RATE: BRED HEIFERS = NO. BRED HEIFERS CULLED FROM HERD/NO. BRED HEF. BEFORE CULL BREEDING PROGRAM FOR HEIFERS = NO. HEIFERS BRED AS YEARLING/NO. HEF. IN HERD It c a n o REPLACEMENT RATE: COWS = NO. COWS CULLED FROM HERD/NO. COWS IN HERD BEFORE CULLING I • % IN YEAR 1 LIVESTOCK WILL BE ON LEASED SUMMER RANGE FOR ( 3 \ MONTHS STARTING IN THE | C \ MD. OF THE YEAR ENDING IN THE \ ? \ MD. OF THE YEAR - 68 -i s presented. The importance of th i s information w i l l become apparent i n the discussion of Figure 3.3 that follows. The diagonal submatrix D^n 2 ^ of Figure 3.1 i s pre-sented i n Figure 3.3 i n more d e t a i l . The a c t i v i t i e s of t h i s submatrix account for livestock on hand, purchased and sold during the summer quarter period. The closing livestock on hand at the end of spring i s transferred down to the open-ing stock of summer (the second submatrix of F i g . 3.3). The transfer between the two seasons i s not a one-to-one correspondence because animal class changes are accounted for at the end of the spring season. For example, bred heifers bred l a s t spring transfer as cows to the summer opening stock submatrix and i n addition, steer and he i f e r calves born the previous spring are transferred down as yearlings. Year-l i n g heifers are transferred to the bred heifer class i f they are to calve next spring. Table 3.8 indicates that for the Base Ranch situation no heife r calves are bred as year-l i n g s . S i m i l a r l y a bred h e i f e r a f t e r f i r s t calving w i l l become a cow. The a.. value of 0.90 entered under the cow a c t i v i t y i s i d e n t i f i e d as the c a l f crop percentage for cows. The input value was s p e c i f i e d i n Table 3.8 and states that for any number of cows exposed to b u l l s on the ranch, 90% of cows w i l l give calves that survive to weaning weight. The 10% that.don't calye w i l l be c u l l e d . Bred heifers calve at a r e l a t i v e l y optimistic c a l f crop rate of 100%. Genetic-laws dictate that a c a l f has a 50/50 chance of being either Spring Cattle Year 1 - Closing Stock Summer Sales Yr. 1 Death Loss Summer Cattle Year 1 - Closing Stock Cows Hef. Calves Str. Calves Bred Hef. Vv Uaf zr• ner. Bulls Cows Yearling Strs. Culls Hef. Calves Str. Calves Cows Hef. Calves Str. Calves Bred Hef. Yr. Hef. Yr. Strs. Bulls BOUND LEVEL FX FX FX FX OBJECTIVE FUNCTION 297 240 CONSTRAINTS Year 1: Spring Cattle Control Cows Heifer Calves Steer Calves Bred Heifers Yearling Heifers Bulls 1 1 1 1 X 1 * Year 1: Sinner Cattle Control Cows Heifer Calves Steer Calves Bred Heifers Yearling Heifers Yearling Steers Bulls Culls .95 T .45 .'50 .45 .50 T T I I .15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Fall Cattle Cows Heifer Calves Steer Calves Bred Heifers Yearling Heifers Yearling Steers Bulls I T T l T T . T F i g u r e 3.4. D e t a i l e d D e s c r i p t i o n of Animal Submatrices, Sp r i n g , Summer and F a l l o f Year 1. - 70 -sex. Therefore an a.. value of 0.50 i s entered i n the matrix for h e i f e r and steer calves. In summary, livestock age as follows. Cows give calves or c u l l s . Heifer calves give bred yearlings or yearling heifers according to the breed-ing plan. Steer calves age to yearling steers. Bred heifers transfer to cows and also giving calves and c u l l s . Yearling heifers w i l l become bred yearlings. Bulls trans-fer as b u l l s . There i s no option i n the model to r e t a i n male calves for breeding purposes since most commercial beef cow operations obtained b u l l s from outside the herd. During summer livestock sales and purchases occur. As stated i n Table 3.7, 45 yearling steers and 30 c u l l cows were sold during summer months. The matrix generator by multiplying average weight of yearling steers by anticipated price (825 l b s . x $.36/lb. = $297) enters the objective function c o e f f i c i e n t . The cash received i s accounted for i n the cash flow row during the month of August. The calculations for c u l l cows would be s i m i l a r to that of yearling steers. During the summer 4 hei f e r calves and 3 steer calves died. This a c t i v i t y enters the model at a fixed l e v e l . The f i n a l group of a c t i v i t i e s presented i n Figure 3.3 i s the accounting of livestock on hand at the end of the summer period. At t h i s point the closing stock of summer i s transferred down to the opening stock of f a l l . This procedure and l o g i c i s c a r r i e d out for a l l quarters of year 1 and subsequent years of the model. - 71 -3.4.3 F i n a n c i a l Submatrices Description In the preceding section discussion focussed on how feed and livestock a c t i v i t i e s were treated i n the matrix structure. Many of the production a c t i v i t i e s d i r e c t l y a f f e c t cash receipts or outlays and therefore the p r o f i t a b i l i t y of the farm. F i n a n c i a l aspects of the model w i l l be the discussion of t h i s section. Table 3.9 (Table 14 of input form) i s a summary of costs involved i n produc-ing mixed hay i n year one of the model. Mixed hay was the only crop grown on the ranch, and as a r e s u l t a l l crop production costs are allocated to t h i s crop. The t o t a l cash production costs during the year was $12,980. and t h i s amount i s broken down into various monthly expenditures by expense items. The matrix generator sums the t o t a l acres of mixed hay grown on own and rented land and divides by the figure of $12,980 by t h i s sum (245 acres v $12,980 = $52.98). The r e s u l t ($52.98/acre) i s the cash cost of producing mixed hay on own land and the value i s entered as an objective function c o e f f i c i e n t of -52.98. Growing mixed hay on rented 1 land would have an additional rental charge cost associated with i t . The cash expenditures occur during d i f f e r e n t months of the year. From Table 3.9 i t can be seen that $530 was spent i n the month of March. An a.. value of $2.16 (cash costs per acre) i s entered i n the matrix as a cost i n the March cash accounting row. The same procedure i s followed for a l l expenses for a l l - 72 -months. The t o t a l monthly sum w i l l be equal to the objec-t i v e function value of $52.98. Livestock expenses are treated i n a manner sim i l a r to that for crop expenses. Table 3.10 presents the t o t a l annual livestock expenses ( $ 9 , 2 4 0 ) , and t h i s t o t a l expense i s broken down into monthly expenditures as shown. The a l l o c a t i o n of livestock expenses i s treated on a herd basis, not on an i n d i v i d u a l animal basis. In Table 3.10 i t i s shown that $500 i s spent on hired labour i n January. The figure entered into the cash accounting row for January i s $0.0541 (500 v 9,240) representing that f r a c t i o n of t o t a l livestock expenses associated with January labour costs. This method of c a l c u l a t i o n applies to the remaining cash control months. The buying and s e l l i n g of feed and/or livestock i s straightforward. S e l l i n g a c t i v i t i e s enter the objective function as a p o s i t i v e a^ .. value and enter the cash accounting row i n the month sp e c i f i e d i n the input form as a negative value. Purchasing a c t i v i t i e s on the other hand, have a negative objective function value and a p o s i t i v e cash a.. value. This ID treatment i s applied to a l l remaining a c t i v i t i e s of the model. For example, Table 19 of the input form accounts for cash inflows of a more general nature. That i s , other farm income, asset sales, loans negotiated during the year and owner's contributions from outside sources. These items are merely cash receipts i n a p a r t i c u l a r month and consequently the appropriate amount i s entered into the cash flow row for - 73 -Table 3.9. Mixed Hay Production Costs (Abstracted from Table 14 i n Appendix 1) Nature of Expenditure Total $ j Per Year liar. •> t . Apr. 5 1 Hay t i June 71 July i I Aug. n Sept. si Seed /.TOO Fort. A OOO 1 a ocio 'Sprays Ec/ulP. EXD. 3--5-O0 i .TOO 3 00 tOOO J Z O O ~S~CO Tustbm Wk. s.oOO \ 1 ooo . O O O Hired Lab. 3, ooo jrc> a soo Other Exp. 1. T I ^ . ^ C - ?oo $ Other Exp. 2. /?, HHts 2. SO Other Exp. 3. Table 3.10. Livestock Production Costs (Abstracted from Table 10 in Appendix 1). ( Description of FniTchases Total $ Per Year Jan. S I Feb. Mar. »1 „ Apr. 5.1 Salt Minerals (ZOO JS~OO Bedding Vet. 6 Medicine / FOO S~6Q Breeding 3/-5" Insurance A5"0 Jrht. 6 Hauling TOO Sales. Commissions / 3</S Hired Labour 3 OOO J5T06 JTOO Other Exp. 1 Other Exp. 2 / - 74 -the month concerned. Likewise, Table 20 of the input form accounts for general and overhead cash expenses. The t o t a l amount i s a cash outlay for the year and these expenses are allocated on a monthly basis. Some of these items are p r o f i t and loss items and other items such as loan repayments reduce debt and w i l l be accounted for in the Balance Sheet. 3.4.4 Balance Sheet Items Balance Sheet items are shown i n Table 17 and 18 of the input form (Appendix I ) . This Balance Sheet i s not pre-sented as a table i n t h i s section because i t s format does not change and i n addition, these balance sheet items are not dealt with d i r e c t l y i n the matrix structure. The balances for the d i f f e r e n t asset and l i a b i l i t y items are stored i n a separate data f i l e and debited or credited as transactions occur during the three years being considered. These balances are handled by the FORTRAN report writing system. The other input tables appropriate to t h i s debit and c r e d i t accounting concern Table 21 and Table 24. In Table 21 increases or decreases i n fixed assets are noted. Table 24 accounts for the depreci-ation schedule over 3 years. This section has attempted to explain the relationship between the input form, the matrix structure and the c o e f f i c i -ents of the matrix. The values and a c t i v i t i e s represent those of the Base Ranch si t u a t i o n . The input form as designed allows d i f f e r e n t ranching situations to be evaluated through - 75 -use of the matrix generator, simplex algorithm and report writing system developed i n the study. 3.5 Discussion of Model Validation The problem of v e r i f y i n g or v a l i d a t i n g computer models remains one of the most elusive unresolved methodological problems associated with model building. This section w i l l investigate t h i s problem. Reichenbach (1951, p. 256) i n The Rise of S c i e n t i f i c Philosophy, stated that: " . . . v e r i f i a b i l i t y i s a necessary constitu-ent of the theory of meaning. A sentence, the truth of which cannot be determined from possible observations i s meaningless." Sprowls (1964, p. 148) r e f e r r i n g to computer models of manage-ment control systems which have not been validated, notes that: "I am prepared to look at each of them as an i n t e r e s t i n g i s o l a t e d case which can be described to me, but from which I s h a l l draw no conclusions." Naylor and Finger (1967, p. 100) aft e r examining philosophical views on v a l i d a t i o n , suggest a three stage approach to v e r i -f i c a t i o n . (1) Construct a set of hypotheses and postulates for the process using a l l available information. (Observations, general knowledge, relevant theory and i n t u i t i o n ) . (2) Attempt to v e r i f y the assumptions of the model by subjecting them to empirical t e s t i n g . (3) Compare the input-output transformations generated by the model to those generated by the r e a l world. - 76 -The authors suggest t h a t i f the model developed was r e l a -t i v e l y simple,one may bypass the f i r s t two phases or steps of the mu l t i - s t a g e v e r i f i c a t i o n procedure and concentrate on the accuracy of the model's p r e d i c t i o n s . Furthermore, they s t a t e t h a t : " I f the model i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by (1) a small number of v a r i a b l e s , (2) a small number of l i n e a r equations, (3) no s t o c h a s t i c v a r i a b l e s , and (4) pre-d i c t i o n s f o r only one or two time p e r i o d s , then one may be w i l l i n g to concentrate on the t h i r d step of the procedure w i t h a minimum of r i s k . " The t h i r d stage of the v e r i f i c a t i o n procedure c o n s i s t s of t e s t i n g the model's a b i l i t y to p r e d i c t the behaviour of the system under study. Two types of c r i t e r i a seem appropriate i n t e s t i n g the degree t o which data generated by the model conform to observed d a t e — h i s t o r i c a l v a l i d a t i o n and v a l i d a -t i o n by f o r e c a s t i n g . The primary o b j e c t i v e of t h i s t h e s i s was'to develop a computerized information system d e s c r i b i n g and p r e d i c t i n g the way i n which a beef ranch performs over time. Accord-i n g l y , the model represents a c t u a l ranching behaviour so that i t may be used f o r experimental p r e d i c t i o n . Because of the nature of the model the author adopted a h i s t o r i c a l v a l i d a t i o n procedure. The b a s i c response v a r i a b l e s e l e c t e d f o r v a l i d a t i n g the model was net worth. In comparing t h i s value w i t h h i s t o r i c a l data, the models performance could be v a l i d a t e d . In s o l v i n g the model and r e t u r n i n g the out-put t o the user f o r comments and recommendations, i t was - 77 -found i n fact that model v a l i d a t i o n was d i f f i c u l t . Results suffered from a common problem encountered i n many empirical studies, that i s , the data's own r e l i a b i l i t y was questionable. Hence, model v a l i d i t y cannot always be confirmed i f the v a l i d i t y of the data used i n the model i s questionable. Of the ranchers who cooperated, some had accurate h i s t o r i c a l records, others r e l i e d p a r t i a l l y on less accurate accounting procedures and consequently the results were not always as anticipated. Subsequent runs using more accurate data resulted i n plans as anticipated. Comments from ranchers who partipated i n model v a l i d a -tion were encouraging. Some for the f i r s t time saw a complete management information report for t h e i r ranch. In most cases the p a r t i c i p a t i n g ranchers found the reports generated from the model i n t e r e s t i n g , educational and some requested further analyses of al t e r n a t i v e s . In many cases the v a l i d a t i o n proce-dure would have been accomplished more e a s i l y i f accurate farm records were kept. Schrank and Holt (1967; p. 105) state that: "The v a l i d a t i o n problem i n prediction and p o l i c y applications concerns whether we can re l y on the re s u l t s generated by the model and whether any p a r t i c u l a r model i s the best available." The author therefore uses the c r i t e r i o n of usefulness as a v a l i d a t i o n method. This s h i f t s the emphasis from the con-cept of whether the model developed i s true or f a l s e , to the question of whether the errors i n the model render i t - 78 -too weak to serve the intended purpose, namely, farm planning. The author concluded that the model developed i s a v a l i d d e s criptive/predictive t o o l applicable to beef farm research. This chapter has presented the empirical model and investigated the problem of model v a l i d a t i o n . In section 1 the conceptualization problems encountered i n building a beef model and adapting i t to an extension environment were discussed. This was followed by a presentation of the entire model structure and how various model subsectors t i e d together. A detailed description of selected submatrices was presented i n section 3.3. The relat i o n s h i p between the input form, matrix generator and beef model were highlighted. The chapter closed with a discussion of c r i t e r i a used i n model v a l i d a t i o n . The conclusion i s reached that the model developed i s a v a l i d d e s c r i p t i v e / p r e d i c t i v e t o o l applicable to beef farm research. CHAPTER IV MODEL APPLICATIONS AND RESULTS The previous chapter presented d e t a i l s of the beef model developed and the parameters of the Base Ranch s i t u a -t i o n . In t h i s chapter the re s u l t s and reports generated by the beef management information system w i l l be presented and the information they contain examined. The reports presented are the re s u l t of the descriptive/budgeting Base Ranch s i t u a t i o n . This discussion i s followed by test i n g various options as to how the p r o f i t a b i l i t y of the ranch may be improved under alternative assumptions concerning which sets of variables are predetermined and which are to be optimized. Conclusions w i l l then be drawn concerning the best management practice to follow. 4.1 Results and Analysis of Base Ranch The Base Ranch s i t u a t i o n as described and the input data thereof i n Appendix I was key punched and a data deck obtained. This was subsequently coded into the MPSX lin e a r programming format (Appendix I I ) , and a solution obtained (Appendix III) . The solution values i n MPSX format werecr then read into a FORTRAN program (a report writing system) and reports generated. These reports consisted of an inven-tory report for the appropriate time periods, a farm income - 80 -statement, a projected cash flow statement, balance sheets, f i n a n c i a l summary s t a t i s t i c s and a livestock count summary. In addition to these reports, others may also be prepared; however, these were .considered to be the most important. 4.1.1 Inventory Report The f i r s t report considered i s the farm inventory report. The inventory report i s a l i s t i n g of a l l crops and livestock on hand at the beginning and ending of the account-ing year. Beginning and ending inventory balances are necessary i n order to account for changes i n inventories over the time period, that i s , i n the preparation of farm income statements and balance sheets. Table 4.1 indicates the inven-tory position of the Base Ranch for the accounting year of 19 75. Under Column A i s a l i s t i n g of inventory items and transactions that occur. Only crops or feed that pertain to the production a c t i v i t i e s of the Base Ranch are itemized, mixed hay and barley are dealt with and most classes of animals are considered. The second column presents the d o l l a r value of inventory items at January 1 and at December 31 of 1975 accordingly. On January 1 there was a reported inventory value of $35,255 of mixed hay (504 tons valued at $70/ton). The inventory of mixed hay at January 1 i s c a l -culated by considering the winter feeding schedule and determining how much feed would have been eaten from the beginning of the winter feeding period to December 31, 1974. Purchases, sales, production of inventory items and consumption Table 4.1 Farms Inventory Report •TFM O F S C R I P T I O N » A M O U N T J A N . i t 1975 DEC.31 1975 M ? X F 0 HAY PLUS: PlCCHASFO LPS*: SALFS < US":0 FQU«LS:C»LCULATro INVENTORY P»0|.eY HconaT^Ci •'•iVFNTORY PLUS: PUBCHAS'O L eSS: SALFS USFD FQU*LS:CALCULATrD INVENTORY 35255. 35510. 1285. T O T A L c°n°s C 1 W S HcpnoTC[) TNVFNTORY PLUS: P'J'CHASFD P P ^ O U C F O L CSS: S'-ITS 01*0 e0U»LSsrALCUL»*?O TNVcNTORY HPt^ cn C A L V E S o":pnoT*D INVENTORY PL'JS: PV cC u'S c0 ' . p p c p y c e o : L rSS: SHFS OTPO COU-'LS^'LCULATFO INVPNTORY ST= r" C S L V F ? qeorioTrp 'HVFNTOPY PLUS: PUPfMAS'rD P""D !JCFO L rSS: S « L P « 01*0 cQUtL?JCALCULATED INVPNTORY M cn H P I F P ° S KFO'jaTCn TNVCNT1<»Y PLUS: PUPCHACcr) PtCHJCF") L CSS: S»L eS 0!rO pQUALSiCALCULATEO THVFNTORV YP&OLINC HF!FFR5 Beor9TP0 tNVPNTORY PLUS: PUPCHAS50 36540. 60400. 3295. 38804. 60400. 8100. 8100. 12300. 12300. 5940. 5940. 5790. Q U A N T J TY 504. 3 0 . 7 3 5 . 20. 741. 50 7. 12. 6 3 . 0. 0. 45. 30. TON TON •ON TON TON TON TON TON TON TON TON TON 300 0 0 0 0 300 •JO 07 3 30 0 0 0 0 30 0 HO HQ HO HO HO HO 60 H O 0 H O 90 H O 06 H O 4 H O 60 H O 60 HO 0 HO Hn HO HO 60 HO HO HO HO HO HO 30 HO HO HO t TO.0O/T0N » 70.00/TOM iilO.OO/TON illO.OO/TON f 268./ HO % 268./ HO * 13 5./ HD * 135./ HO t 205./ HO I 205./ HO * 190./ HO * 198./ HD * 193./ HO Table 4.1. Farms Inventory Report (Cont'd.) pRfjoueso L E S S : . S H ^ S o i r o =0U»LStC»LCUL4TF0 I N V C N T O R Y Y=ARLt*JG S T C C 0 S orpTOTCQ TMVFNTORY PLUS: PURCHASEO P R O O U C F D LFSSt S 4 L F S eUUALS«CALCULATFO I N V E N T O R Y BULLS pconoTcn TNy C N T O R Y P L U S : P U ' C H S S F O P R C O U C F O L F S S : S S L F S 0! = 0 cQU»LS:C«LCUL&TCO I N V E N T O R Y YrlRLING F E C O = RS qcpOOTfn TNVcNTORY PLUS: PU°CH«<;FO PPifjiJCFO L E S S : S 4 l c < : OTFO FQ'JALS: C A L C U L A T E I N V E N T O R Y 2-YP O L D F«OFRS DFooDTen I N V F N T O R Y PLUS: PURCHIKTO PPnnuCFO L F S S : S»leS OIFD cOUALS:CAlCULATCD I N V E N T O R Y CULLS 95PORTFO I N V E N T O R Y PLUS: O U ° C H A « ; E O PR? O U C F O L C S S : S A L F S O I F O C Q U A L S : C A L C U L A T F D I N V E N T O R Y 5790. 16000. 16000. 30 30 0 30 0 0 60 60 0 0 16 <t 0 0 16 HO HO HP HO HO HO HO HO nn HO HO HD HO HO HO HO HO HD HO HO HO HO HO HO HO HD HO HO HO HO 3 0 H D 3 0 H O T " T * L CA'TtF 123 530. 0 . 120530. 0 0 H O HO $ 193./ HO $ 258./ HO * 258./ HO JIOOO./ HO $1000./ HO * 328./ HO i 328./ HO $ 4*8./ HD * 448./ HO * 200./ HO * 200. / HO 00 to TO^ftt P A R K I N V E N T O R Y 1 6 7 3 3 4 . - 83 -take p l a c e d u r i n g the year and r e s u l t s i n a c l o s i n g i n v e n -t o r y f o r 1975. The f i g u r e , $35,510 f o r mixed hay, i n d i c a t e s the c l o s i n g i n v e n t o r y value on December 31. The same accounting i s t r u e of a l l crops and feeds. L i v e s t o c k values are s i m i l a r l y o b t a i n e d . The herd s i z e was kept constant throughout the year and as a r e s u l t i n v e n t o r y values do not change. The i n v e n t o r y value of $128,530 on December 31 corresponds w i t h l i n e 17.241 o f i n p u t t a b l e 17. Column C o f Table 4.1 l i s t s i n v e n t o r y items ( u n i t s t h e r e o f ) on hand a t the beginning and end of the p e r i o d , purchased, produced, s o l d of used. For example the open-i n g stock o f mixed hay was 504 tons. In a d d i t i o n , 30 tons were purchased and 735 tons produced. Twenty tons were s o l d and 741 tons f e d ; l e a v i n g a balance of 507 tons on hand a t the end o f the p e r i o d . Under the l i v e s t o c k items an account of the opening and c l o s i n g numbers, of the purchases and s a l e s and of the t r a n s f e r of l i v e s t o c k from one c l a s s t o another, may be o b t a i n e d . For example, t u r n i n g t o y e a r l i n g s t e e r s i n the l i v e s t o c k s e c t i o n one notes t h a t there i s no c o n t r i b u t i o n t o i n v e n t o r y but s a l e s t r a n s a c t i o n s took p l a c e d u r i n g the year. The r e p o r t i n d i c a t e s t h a t 60 y e a r l i n g s t e e r s were produced and s o l d . These y e a r l i n g s were produced from 60 s t e e r c a l v e s t h a t were on hand January 1 t h a t have aged and subsequently t r a n s f e r r e d i n t o the y e a r l i n g animal - 84 -c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . The l a s t column i s the d o l l a r value per unit of inventory item. An inventory account of the nature presented i n Table 4.1 allows ranchers to trace inventory movements and consequently provides information es s e n t i a l to sound management decisions. 4.1.2 Farm Income Statement The farm income statement summarizes the results of the production a c t i v i t i e s over a s p e c i f i e d accounting period. This staement i s presented i n Table 4.2. The costs incurred consist of the expenses i n s e l l i n g farm products, overhead farm expenses and depreciation. Under the income section livestock and crop sales are the only contributors to income. It i s shown i n Table 4.2 that t o t a l income (gross farm income) increased for the three year period; being approximately $58,600 i n the f i r s t year, $69,000 i n the second year and $69,200 i n the t h i r d year. The largest contributor . to gross farm income for the three years was livestock sales (±$57,500 i n the f i r s t year and ± $68,000 in the second and t h i r d year). Crop sales were minimal. The s l i g h t increase i n income may be attributed to s l i g h t l y higher c a t t l e prices projected for. 1976 and 1977. Total farm expenses are shown as being approximately $57,500 per annum over the three years. Crop expenses under the Base Ranch s i t u a t i o n were $13,380 for the. f i r s t year and projected at $16,380 for 1976 and $16,320 for 1977. Crop expenses have risen over the two projected years, however Table 4.2. Farm Income Statement FMHIEII NAHFj THB 8*<* PANCM lOPSCRTPT tVF flUO«PTINCI FAR* INCOME STATMFNT JAN I 1975 TO DEC M «97T 1975 CROPS SHFSl H]te<3 H»V 1200. T 0 T » L OOP S»IP$« 1200. UVF?T"CK SAIESI H«»FER CALVES 9976. STFCp CALVES 1*877. YCAOLtNO HEIFERS 6510. VKARL TNG STEFRS 17820. BULLS 110*. CULLS 7200. TOTiL LIVESTOCK SM.ESI 57487. OTHER FARH |NC0!»? 0. TOTAL, OTHER TNCOHE 0, TOTAL INCOME! * 58687. • X P F N S F S : CRIPS FXPCNSfSt SEfO 1 5 0 0 . F ^ R T U H " * 2 0 0 0 . 500HYS 0 . F9U?P«»FNT FXPE'IS* 3 5 0 0 . CUSTOM WORK 2 0 0 0 . Hiocn L A P O U " 3 0 0 0 . 14'40 RENTJL 4 0 0 . OTneo CROP EXPFNSES * 9 8 0 . T 0 T A L CROP EXPENSES 13380. L !V C ST0CK EXPENSES* •M>-n HAV 2 2 5 0 . RAOLEY 6 9 7 4 . IT A "ten PANCF REOUIPEO 8 6 8 . H'lllS 5 2 0 0 . S*I.T 2 0 0 . •* ! N R * M S 1 2 0 0 . BFi^nlNr, 5 5 . V K T " E O I C A I 1 8 0 0 . U R T O I N O 3 1 5 . INSt^ ANCE 2 5 0 . f ' X f t i H I HAULAGE 8 0 0 . SALES CP«NIS!0'N • 1 3 * 5 . Hi R^O LApOllP 3 0 0 0 . niHEc tJVESTOCK EXPENSES 2 7 5 . TOTAL l!V*STOCX EXPENSES! 2 4 5 3 2 . 197& 1977 1 2 0 0 . 14040. 17820. 8370. 19800. 1200. 6600. 1200. 67830. 0. t 69030. 375, 375. 14400. 18225. 8601. 19800. 1200. 6600. 68828. 0. 69203. 1 5 0 0 . 2 6 0 0 . 0. 4000. 2800. 36C0. 600. 1280. 16380. 0. 5650. 86Q. 6000. 200. 1200. 55. 1800. 315. 250. 800. 1345. 3000. 275. 21758. 1 5 0 0 . 2 6 0 0 . 0. 4000. 2'J00. 3600. 540. 1280. 16320. 0. 5876. 868. 6500. 700. 1200. 55. 1800. 315.. 250. 800. 1345. 3000. 275. 22484. Table 4.2. Farm Income Statement (Cont'd.) ov eRHFAo M 0 * 1 C X P E N S F S : 0 * B T t N T F R F S T 9 9 5 0 . MACHINERY R F P A T R S 1 5 0 0 . L I V E S T O C K E Q U I P . F X P E N S F S 7 5 . i i . JTO t •"SUCKS L T C ' N S F FFF.S 2 0 0 . B U ' L O I N G R C P A T " S 5 0 0 . f - N C F S 3 0 0 . V ^ H K L C r, r QUI p > . r - u e i . o U 2 5 0 0 . nmPANI f. H*-.V ! N C , n i ^ 0 . F A R » I N S U R A N C E OOO. P^NT 0 . H Y 0 ° ? A N D T H L ' P H - ) N B 8 4 0 . purjDcqTY TAX^S 2 5 0 0 . TOTAL CARM E X P E N S E S TOTAL E X P E N S E S : 1 9 2 6 5 . 5 7 1 7 7 . 1 9 2 6 5 , 5 7 4 0 3 . 1 9 2 6 5 . 5 9 0 6 9 . E X C E S S OF rNcnvc OVER E X P E N S E S 1 5 1 0 . 1 1 6 2 7 . 1 1 1 3 4 . 4 0 0 : T N V c N T Q i > Y D F C 3 1 1 9 7 5 1 6 7 3 3 4 . L = S $ « I N V E N T O R Y .1 A N 1 1 9 7 5 1 6 5 0 7 0 . L E S S ! O F P P C C I A T I O M A M T F O R T H T S P E R T O O 4 6 5 0 . 1 6 7 3 3 4 . 1 6 7 3 3 4 . 5 2 5 0 . 1 6 7 3 3 4 . 1 6 7 3 3 4 . 5 1 2 0 . N E T F A ' H 1 N C 0 M F - 6 7 6 . 6 3 7 7 . 6 0 1 4 . - 87 -these expenses may be somewhat underestimated with present i n f l a t i o n a r y conditions. Total livestock expenses are less i n 1976 and 1977 than i n 1975 as a r e s u l t of less feed being purchased for winter feeding. If the rancher miscalculates his requirements v i s a  v i s his feed purchases, the extra amount of feed needed i s bought. In t h i s case the rancher spe c i f i e d that for 1975 he w i l l purchase 30 tons of mixed hay at $75 per ton; $2250 i s entered as an expense on the income statement. However the rancher s p e c i f i e d on the input form (line 12.091 Table 12) that 60 tons of barley was to be purchased. This amount was not enough to f u l f i l l the requirements as spe c i f i e d by. the winter feeding schedule. In fact 6 3.4 tons were required and $6,974 (63.4 x $110) i s therefore entered under livestock expenses instead of $6,600. This procedure applies to a l l feed items i n a l l time periods. Note that t h i s i s the only occasion where the straight budgeting procedure and the model solution may not balance. Livestock expense items such as s a l t and minerals remained constant over the three years. Overhead farm expenses are estimated at $19,265 annually. Subtracting t o t a l expenses from t o t a l income allows an excess of income over expense figures to be calculated. These results of the three years may be considered to be the operating pro-f i t s for each of the years. For 1975 the ranch did rather poorly with an excess of income over expenses of only $1,510. - 88 -The following two year's excess of income over expenses rose to $11,627 and $11,134 respectively. The operating margin of p r o f i t (excess of income over expenses divided by t o t a l income) for the three years was 2.5%, 16.8% and 16.0% respectively. This means that i n 1975 the ranch had 2.5* remaining as operating p r o f i t from each d o l l a r of crop and livestock sales. This i s as expected given market conditions for c a t t l e i n that year. Prices for c a t t l e improved i n 1976 and 1977 and the operating margin of p r o f i t r e f l e c t s t h i s improvement. The operating cost r a t i o (defined as t o t a l expenses divided by t o t a l sales) i s 97%, 83% and 84% for the three years. Calculation of annual net farm income of the ranch requires that inventory changes and depreciation be accounted for. Inventory changed s l i g h t l y i n the f i r s t year and not at a l l i n the remaining two years. A depreciation allowance of approximately $5,000 i s allowed for i n each of the three years and consequently net farm income i n the f i r s t years was a negative $876, and a p o s i t i v e of $6,37 7 i n the second year and $6,014 i n the t h i r d year. Net p r o f i t r a t i o i s defined as net farm income divided by sales. In the Base Ranch t h i s figure i s -1.4%, 9.2% and 8.6% for the three years.. This means that for every d o l l a r of farm product sold, 9.2* and 8.6* i n p r o f i t ultimately went to the company i n years 1976 and 1977 and a 1.4* loss was - 89 -incurred i n 1975. The margin of p r o f i t r a t i o , the operating cost r a t i o and the net p r o f i t r a t i o for the Base Ranch are summarized i n Table 4.3. Table 4.3. Ratio Analysis of Income Statement 1975 1976 1977 % Operating Margin of P r o f i t 2.5 16.8 16.0 % Operating Cost Ratio 97.5 8 3.2 84.0 % Net P r o f i t Ratio -1.4 9.2 8.6 An analysis of the income statement provides c r i t i c a l f i n a n c i a l information concerning the ranch operation and allows evaluation of i t s prospects for the future. Likewise, the r a t i o comparisons indicate fundamental economic conditions of the farm. One may conclude that 1975 was a very poor year for the representative ranch and that 1976 and 1977 showed only s l i g h t improvement. 4.1.3 Projected Cash Flow Summary Presented i n Table 4.4 i s a cash flow statement showing farm business transactions that a f f e c t "cash". The sources and uses of cash were recorded on a monthly basis for 1975 and on an annual basis for the l a s t two years. Crop, l i v e -stock, c a p i t a l sales, other farm income and owner's contribu-tions are the p r i n c i p a l sources of cash inflows during the years. Loans are also considered to be a source of cash. Table 4.4. Cash Flow Statement FAPMtFP) N A " E : THF RA<;C RANCH « O - S C R I P T I V F B U D G E T I N G ! P O O J C C T C O C A S H FLOW SUMMARY J A N 1 1 9 7 5 TH DEC 31 1 9 7 5 TO TAL JAN. FEB. MAP . APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. S ^ P T OCT. NOV. OEC. T0 T AL T ? T A L 1"T5 1976 1977 F A » M INCO"'1: L TV cS T rICK S « L F S 574B7. 0 . 0. 0. 0. 0 . 1200. 6000. 13365. 12069. 24851. 0 . 0 . 67B70. 6S83P. rp-jo ?&L r S 1200. 0 . 0 . 0 . 1200. 0 . 0. 0. 0. 0 . 0. 0 . 0 . 1200. 375. CAP TTAL SAL^S 1000. 0 . 0. 0 . 1000. 0 . 0. 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0. 0. 0. TTHPR FA9M tNCO"E 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0. 0 . 0. 0. 0. 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0. OWNERS CONTRIBUTION 120. 0 . 0. 60. 0 . 0 . 0. 0 . 0 . 0 . . 60. 0. 0. 120. 120. TFBM LIABILITIES ' .000. 0 . 0. 0. 4000. 0 . 0. 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . TOTAL CASH IN 63807. 0 . 0 . 60. 6200. 0 . 1200. 6000. 13365. 1206O. 249! 3. 0 . 0. 69150. 69323. L!V cSTnCK EXP=NSCS 24532. 3670. 5363. 1583. ' 650. 450. 637. 213. 329. 963. 9040. 1134. 500. 21758. 2?4B4. CROPS e .XOFNSP« 13380. 0 . 0 , 930. 1450. 4300. 1500. 1700. 1500. 2000. 0. 0. 0. 16310. 16320. F A ' " OVERHEADS 9315. 70. 270. 720. 795. 8T0. 870. 570. 470. 3 20. 2820. 570. 970. 9315. 9 3 ! 5 . QWNC*S WITHDRAWALS 4000. 375. 375. 300. 350. 300. 350. 300. 300. 400. 300. 350. 300. 4000. 4000. TNTC^CST paYMrNTS 9950. 0 . 0. 0 . 0. 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 9950. 0. 9950. 99S0. O c 3 T PAYMPNTS-PRINC. 13000. 0 . 0 . 500. 0 . 3500. 0. 500. 0. 500. 8000. 0 . 0 . 13000. '13000. C AD I T AL PURCHASES 3000. 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 3000. 0. 0 . 0. 0 . 0. 0. 0. 0 . 0 . TOT AL CASH OUT 77177. 4115. 6008. 4033. 3245. 12420. 3357. 3283. 2598. 4183. 20160. 12004. 1770. 74403. 75069. MONTtM YEAR I END BAL. -13370. - 4 1 1 5 . -6008. - 3 9 7 3 . 2955. -12420. - 2 1 5 7 . 2717. 10767. 7886. 4753. - 12004. - 1 7 7 0 . - 5 2 5 3 . - 5 7 4 6 . BEGINNING CASH 50000. 36630. 31377. ACCUMULATED BALANCE 0 . 45885. 39877. 35903. 38858. 26438. 24281. 26998. 37765. 45651. 50404. 38400. 3663 0 . 31377. 25631. OPERATING CREO R c 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0. 0 . 0. 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . - 91 -Cash outlays such as farm overheads, owner's withdrawals, inter e s t payments, debt, and p r i n c i p a l repayments are assumed to be the same i n 1976, 1977 as they were i n 1975 and con-sequently there i s some loss of accuracy i n the Mast two/ years. Cash expenses are t o t a l l e d on a monthly basis for the f i r s t year, as are expenses and a monthly ending balance i s obtained. The cash balance at the beginning of the planning horizon was assumed to be $50,000, the r e s u l t of the excep-t i o n a l l y good c a t t l e prices i n 1974. Operating loans are negotiated when cash d e f i c i t s occur. The ending balance i n December of 1975 i s used as the beginning cash balance for 1976 and likewise the ending balance of 1976 i s used as the opening balance for 1977. It i s noted from Table 4.4 that the cash balance for a l l time periods i s p o s i t i v e and fluctuates from a low of approximately $24,000 to a high of about $50,000. The s t a r t -ing balance of $50,000 may, i n retrospect, have been set at too high a l e v e l and yet given the fact that the asset p o s i -t i o n of the Base Ranch was f a i r l y strong and that f a l l l i v e -stock sales had recently taken place the opening balance may be j u s t i f i e d . Most livestock sales for the Base Ranch occur during the f a l l period as shown by cash inflows during that period, cash expenses averaged $4,000 to $5,000 per month. A cash flow statement i s considered v i t a l for e f f e c t i v e f i n a n c i a l planning. The previously discussed income state-ment as well as the following balance sheet i s i n s u f f i c i e n t - 92 -in that the l i q u i d i t y position of the firm at any one point of time i s not indicated. L i q u i d i t y refers to the ranch's capacity to generate s u f f i c i e n t cash to meet demands on cash as they f a l l due. Even though a ranch may be operating at a p r o f i t i t may go bankrupt i f i t cannot s a t i s f y the cash claims against i t when they are due. 4.1.4 Statement of Assets, L i a b i l i t i e s and Owner's  Equity The statement of assets, l i a b i l i t i e s and owner's equity or more commonly referred to as the balance sheet, represents the f i n a n c i a l p osition of the farm on December 31. Presented in Table 4.5 i s the Base Ranch's projected balance sheets for three years. Owner's equity at December 31 i s the most important summary figure. Owner's equity represents the amount of the owner's i n t e r e s t i n the ranch. Owner's equity has been projected to slowly increase from $313,714 i n 1975 to $316,212 in 1976 and $318,345 i n 1977. However, the equity position of the ranch may be conservative because the assets are valued at cost and not market values. For example, land holdings were estimated to be $182,000 whereas market value i s e s t i -mated to be $265,000. Current assets itemized on the balance sheet include cash and those assets which i n the normal course of the farm business may be turned into cash within a year.''" Table 4.5 indicates that the cash position (itemized as farm bank) of the ranch has decreased from $36,630 i n 1975 to $31,377 and ''"Note that the breeding herd may be further categorized as intermediate assets in the CANFARM accounting system. Table 4 . 5 . Statement of Assets, L i a b i l i t i e s and Owner's Equity FAR « | F e i VA«»5l THE BA55 RANCH lOPSCHIPTIVP. flUDGETINGI STATEMENT OF ASS«TS, LIABILITIES, AND AS AT OFC 31 1974 OWNERS EQUITY • • * ASSSTS •' • « • • • LIABILITIES • • • C U R ' T M T ASS eTSl 197? 1976 1977 CURRENT LIABILITIES: 1975 1976 1977 FAS" SANK CUR'FNT RECEIVABLES 36630. 0. 31377. 0. 25631. 0. CURRFNT PAYABLFS TOTAL CURRPNT LIABILITIES 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. »NVENT"* |es t CR3PSI M I « C O MAY BA^L=V T0 TAL Cinpj INVENTORY 35510. 3295. 38804. 35510. 3295. 38104. 35510. 3295. 38804. TERM LIABILITIES: LIVESTOCK: C0-4S Heicrq riLV^S ?Tesi» CALV=S 3RF.0 HCIFPRS YEARLING HFIFERS V e»°LTNG ST«p^ BULL* YBARL'NG FEcrjFBS 2-YR 0L0 FBFnep^ CULLS TOTAL LIVE5TOCK INVFNTORV 80400. 8100. 12300. 5940. 5790. 0. 16000. . 0. 0. 0. 128530. 80400. 8100. 12300. 594 0. 5790. 0. 16000. 0. 0. 0. 128530. 80400. Bino. 12300. 5940. 5790. 0. 16000. 0. 0. 0. 128530. FARM 1MPR0VCMFNT LOANS BANK LOANS CR c OIT UNIONS CEALFR»SL'PPLY CO. FINANCF COMPANIES FARM CREDIT CORP. FFOFRAL GOVT.INON-FCC 1 PROVINCIAL GOVT. PRIVATF INDIVIDUALS TOTAL TERN LIABILITIES 500. 17500. 0. 4000. 0. 90000. 0. 0. 3600. 115600. 102600. 89600. TOTAL CURRENT ASSETSt 203964. 198.712. 192965. TOTAL LIABILITIES 115600. 102600. 69600. «!XF0 A S S F T S : ( * T COST) * > * OWNFPS FQUITV * • • LA^O C I«P»OV cHPNTS B'.IGS. t STRUCTDRCi; MACHINERY t F0I1IP. LESS: ACCUM. OEPR. 1B2000. 29000. 34000. 20650. 182000. 29000. 34000. 23900. 182000. 29000. 34000. 31020. OWNFRS FOUITY OF JAN I OWNPRS CONTRIBUTIONS LESS OWNERS WITHDRAWALS NET FARM INCOME OWNFRS EOUITY DEC 31 318470. 120. 4000. -876. 313714. 313714. 120. 4000. 6377. 316212. 316212. 120. 4000. 6014. 31B145. T ? T V . UNOFP'TC lATFO COST 224350. 219100. 213980. TOTAL LIAfl. t OWNERS FOUITV 429314. 418812. 407945. OTME". ASS^TSl IyrAN^IBL es INVEST» eNTS T»)TAL nTHFR ASSETS TOTAL ASSETS 0. 1000. 1000. 429314. 0. 1000. 1000. 418812. 0. 1000. 1000. 407945. ••STimTCo M » O . K = T VALUFSS LA10 C I^PROVl-HFNTS BL0G3 C STRUCTURES MACH'NFRY t EQUIPM eN T OTHEH ASSFTS INTANGieLPSIOUnTAS.FTCI 265000. 36000. 31000. 1200. 0. 280000. 35000. 37500. 0. 0. 280000. , 34000. 36000. ' ZSOO. 0. - 94 -$25,631 for 1976 and 1977 respectively. Current receiv-ables are monies not yet co l l e c t e d from customers to whom goods were shipped p r i o r to payment. There were no ..current receivables for the three projected years. Livestock and crop inventories are the remaining items l i s t e d under t o t a l current assets. Total crop inventory has remained constant at approximately $38,800. Likewise l i v e -stock inventory has remained at $128,530 for the three years. Next to be considered on the asset side of the balance sheet i s fixed assets. Fixed assets are valued at cost minus the depreciation accumulated by the date of the balance sheet. It i s noted from Table 4.5 land, buildings, and machinery remain constant over the three years. Accumulated depreciation has increased from approximately $20,000 to $30,000 for the three years. Undepreciated costs of fixed assets are not intended to r e f l e c t market values at the present time. Total undepreciated costs have been decreas-ing on an average $5,000 per year. It may be assumed that the costs to replace fixed assets at some future date may be higher than t o t a l undepreciated costs. This replacement cost i s too variable to be taken into consideration i n the valuation of an asset for balance sheet purposes and con-sequently market values of fixed assets are also shown in the balance sheets. Current l i a b i l i t i e s are a l l debts that f a l l due within the coming year (zero i n Table 4.5). Term l i a b i l i t i e s are - 95 -debts due sometime afte r the date of the balance sheet. A A term loan of $5,000 was negotiated i n 1975 from a dealer or supply company and i s outstanding on December 31, 1975. Over the three year period the ranch has reduced outstanding debt, namely a farm improvement loan, bank loan and the farm c r e d i t corporation loan and as a r e s u l t , t o t a l l i a b i l -i t i e s have decreased from $115,600 i n 1975 to $89,600 i n 1977. Owner's equity or net worth (tot a l assets minus t o t a l l i a b i l i t i e s ) at December 31, 1975 was $313,714. The owner's equity at the st a r t of the planning period was $318,470. If owner's contribution ($120) less withdrawals ($4,000) plus net farm income (-$876) i s added to the opening owner's equity figure of $318,470, the closing balance of $313,714 i s obtained. Withdrawals remain constant at $4,000 annually. Net income i n the second and t h i r d years approximates $6,000 and consequently owner's equity i s $316,212 on December 31, for the second year and $318,345 for the t h i r d year. In presenting the Balance Sheets shown i n Figure 4.5 balances from the Income Statements and Inventory Reports are used. In addition the cash balances from the Cash Flow Statement and information from the input form are required. The following diagram (Figure 4.1) w i l l i d e n t i f y the linkages between the f i n a n c i a l statements and input form and shows how the various reports t i e together to form the "Statement of Assets, L i a b i l i t i e s and Owner's Equity". "^ Note that under some accounting systems, inter e s t and p r i n c i p a l are considered current l i a b i l i t i e s . SCHEDULE OF FIXED ASSETS Last Year's Balance Sheet «•/•-TABLE 21 INPUT' FORM CASH FLOW SUMMARY Beginning Cash Accumulated Balance INVENTORY REPORT TOTAL CROPS TOTAL LIVESTOCK BEGINING BALANCES BALANCE SHEET - 1975 Farm Bank Total Total Crops Li a b i l i t i e s • Total Live- Owner's Equity stock (Jan. 1) Fixed Assets Contributions Depreciation Withdrawals Net Farm Income INCOME STATEMENT Net Farm Income STATEMENT OF OWNER'S CONTRIBUTIONS AND WITHDRAWALS CONT » INPUT FORM TAB 19 WITHDRAWALS » INPUT FORM TAB 20 DEPRECIATION SCHEDULE INPUT FORM TAB 24.18 BALANCE SHEET 1974 Farm Bank. Total L i a b i l i t i e s Inventory Owner's Equity (Dec. 31) IT CREDIT ACCOUNT ADJUSTMENTS TAB 19 INPUT FORM TAB 20 INPUT FORM FIGURE 4.1. Interdependence of Balance Sheet to Financial Reports and Input Fo - 97 -4.1.5 Fin a n c i a l Summary Statement The f i n a n c i a l s i t u a t i o n and the change i n the f i n a n c i a l s i t u a t i o n of the Base Ranch i s summarized by important f i n a n c i a l measures and f i n a n c i a l solvency r a t i o s presented i n Table 4.6. Table 4.6 has been prepared from information abstracted from the income statement, the cash flows state-ment and from balance sheet values. Owner's equity at the star t of the three year planning period was $318,470. Referring to Table 4.6 owner's equity decreased over the three year i n t e r v a l to $318,345. This represents an average percentage change of -.006; b a s i c a l l y n e g l i g i b l e i n d i c a t i n g no growth. The f i n a n c i a l reports thus far presented also provide useful information for c a l c u l a t i n g certain f i n a n c i a l r a t i o s . The r a t i o s presented i n Table 4.6 may be useful when compared to acceptable norms for each f i n a n c i a l c r i t e r i o n . ^ A measure of f i n a n c i a l strength and an indicator of the r i s k l e v e l i n the farm-is the equity r a t i o (%) presented i n Table 4.6. An equity percentage of 70% indicates that the firm i s i n a r e l a -t i v e l y well-established f i n a n c i a l p o s i t i o n . Leverage i n f e r s using borrowed funds to supplement equity c a p i t a l . A leverage r a t i o may be expressed as the r a t i o of debt to equity. A high r a t i o indicates a high debt-to-equity r a t i o . The report indicates that leverage has been decreasing over the years (from .37 to .28). L i q u i d i t y r a t i o ^The acceptable norms, or course, vary over time, over regions, with type of operation, etc. - 98 -Table 4.6. F i n a n c i a l Summary Statement FARMtER) NAM?: THE BASE RANCH (DESCR! PT? VE BUDGETING) FINANCIAL SUMMARY • * * FINANCIAL MEASURES * * * 1975 1976 1977 CASH FARM INCOME 58687. 69030. 69203. CASH FARM EXPENSE 57177. 57403. 58069. NFT CASH FARM_ INCOME 1510. 11627. 11134. VET FARM INCOMF -876. 63 77. 6014. •ir-r fcORTH 313714. 316212. 318345. CHANGE IN NET WORTH -4756. 2497. 2134. * * * FINANCIAL SOLVENCY * * * 1975 1976 1977 CURRENT t INT*S.ASSESS 203964. 198712. 192965. CURRENT 6 INTER.LIABILITIES 0. 0. 0. LONG T<!RM ASSETS 224350. 219100. 213980. LONG r e m , LIABILITIES 115600. 102600. 89600. TOTAL ASSETS 429314. 418812. 407945. T O T A L LIABILITIES 115600. 102600. 89600. * * * FINANCIAL R4TI0S * * 1975 1976 1977 EOUITY-JNET WORTH * IOO)/ASSETS 73.07 75.50 78.04 LEVERAG=»OEBT/EOU!TY 0.37 0.32 0.28 LIQUIDITY POSITION L«/LD 1.9 1.9 !.9 CA 'T TU=»NOVcR = T O T . F A R M T^vEST/ CASH FARM INCOME 7. 6. 6. COST CONTROL =('JCT CASH !NCOME*100)/ 3. CS-SH FARM ' NCOMF 17. 16. - 99 -which i s defined as the r a t i o of long-term assets to long-term debts gives . an indicati o n of the firm's solvency. A 1.25:1 r a t i o may be considered a s a t i s f a c t o r y minimum.''" The Base Ranch r a t i o of 1.8:1, indicates that the firm's assets exceed i t s debt obligations. Capital turnover indicates the number of years needed for gross farm income to equal t o t a l farm investment. It's a measure of the volume or size of the business i n r e l a t i o n to the t o t a l investment on the farm. In general, a low c a p i t a l turnover figure i s desired; but a sa t i s f a c t o r y c a p i t a l turnover r a t i o varies with the type of farming and other economic conditions. The Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food indicates that a beef-cow operation with average net income should take 3.7 years to turn over. The Base Ranch almost takes twice as long (7 years). P r o f i t from the ranch may be improved by increasing income and/or reducing costs. If c a p i t a l turnover shows a sa t i s f a c t o r y volume of business, but net income i s below the industry's average, the conclusion must be reached that costs are too high. To t e l l i f the firm's costs are i n l i n e , one examines the percentage of net cash income to gross cash farm receipts. Table 4.6 indicates that for 1970 net cash income was only 3% of gross cash receipts. For "^Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Money Matters, Publication 379, 1968. - 100 -t h i s type of operation the Ontario Farm Record Book i n d i -cates that 2 3% may be an acceptable norm. 4.1.6 Livestock Count Table 4.7 provides a l i s t i n g of livestock numbers and transactions over the three years. The report i s presented to serve as a check for keeping track of the buying and s e l l i n g transactions for c a t t l e . Table 4.7 indicates that the farm manager adopted a strategy 6<£. keeping a constant number of breeding cows i n the herd. For example 300 cows were wintered over each of the three projected years. The constant number of cows res u l t s from yearling heifers and h e i f e r calves being held back each year to replace losses through c u l l i n g , death and sales. At the end of year 1, 30 yearling heifers are held to replace 30 c u l l cows sold i n year 2. In examining the livestock transactions i n year 1, i t i s seen that the bulk of the sales occur during the f a l l ; 173 calves and 45 yearlings being sold. In the following years the sale a c t i v i t i e s are s i m i l a r to that of year 1. Through-out the years the only type of animals purchased were b u l l s (4 b u l l s each year). The livestock count i s the l a s t report generated by the report writer system. Further statements may be added in future but the key elements of f i n a n c i a l planning; the income statement, balance sheet and cash flows have been documented. Table 4.7 L i v e s t o c k Count ( D e s c r i p t i v e Budgeting) F A O u j P R ) NAME; THE BASF RANCH CD eSCRlP TtV= BUDGET tNG) * « * VFAR I LIVFSTOCK COUNT (NO.HO) • « * 0P cN WINTER CLOSE SPRING CICSE SUMMER CLOSE FALL CLOSc STICK PIJRCH SALE STOCK PURCH SALT STOCK PUPCH SALE OF ATM STOI"K PURCH SALE STOCK c ° w s 300. 0. 0. 300. 0 . 0. 3 00. 0. 0. 0. 300. 0. 0. 300. HFtFER CALVCS 60. 0. 0. 60. 0. 0. 60. 0. 0. 4. 146. 0. B6. 60. ST^rj CALVES AO. 0. 0. 60. 0. 0. 60. 0. 0. 3. 147. 0. 87. 60. IJOCT H=IFFRS 30. 0. 0. 3 0. 0. 0. 30. 0. 0 . 0. 30. 0. 0. 3 0 . Ve»»UtN'", H C j r r p s 3 0 . 0. 0. 30. 0. 0. 30. 0. 0. 0. 60. 0. 30. 30. YEARLING STEEP'S 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 45. 0. 15. 0. 15. 0. PULLS 16. 0. 0. 16. 0. 0. 16. 0. 0. 0. 16. 4. 4 . 16. YFA»LING F==DCRS 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 7-YR OLO FEPO^nS 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. CULLS 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 30. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. * * » L I V E S T O C K C O U N T INO .HDI * * * YEAR 2 C L O S E YEAR 3 CLOSI : PURCH S A L E STOCK PURCH SAI . E STOCK C O J S 0. 0. 300. 0. 0. 300. HFT*EEQ C A L V E S 0. 90. 60. 0. 90. 60. S T E E R C A L V C S 0. 90. 60. 0. 90. 60. qorn H R IF ED S 0. 0. 30. 0. 0. 30. YE»q L I N G H E I F F O S 0. 30. 30. 0. 30. 30. Y E A R L I N G S T F P " S 0. 60. 0. 0. 60. 0. B U L L S 4. 4. 16. 4. 4. 16. Y C A R L TNG FEcrjettj 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 2 - Y R OLD FEEDERS 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 6. C U L L S 0. 30. 0. 0* 30. 0. E X E C U T I O N T F P H I N A T E O - 102 -I t was noted from t h i s discussion that f i n a n c i a l statements a l l t i e together and that r a t i o analysis may be useful to analyze the f i n a n c i a l p o sition of the ranch. The o v e r a l l conclusion reached concerning the f i n a n c i a l p o sition of the Base Ranch for the three projected years i s that the ranches return on investment i s extremely poor and that the s i t u a t i o n i s not considered to be s a t i s -factory. Inferences may be drawn why the returns were r e l a t i v e poor by examining the l i n e a r programming solution (Appendix I I I ) . In section I (row section) of Appendix III resources that are i n excesses may be noted and i n addition the value of scarce resources determined. Under the columns section of Appendix I I I , the reduced cost column indicates the "opportunity cost" of forcing predetermined a c t i v i t i e s into the solution or a l t e r n a t i v e l y for a c t i v i t i e s not i n the basis, the required change to bring them into solution. For example, i t was found that s e l l i n g mixed hay would add to the objective function value. Livestock related a c t i v -i t i e s had a p o s i t i v e or zero cost. I t was observed that the reduced costs for steer c a l f sales, which was forced into the basis, was p o s i t i v e thus i n d i c a t i n g that the prices received from s e l l i n g steers was not s u f f i c i e n t to cover the costs of r a i s i n g that animal. The conclusion i s reached that low market prices were the main reason for low farm income. This statement i s supported by the graphs presented - 103 -i n Appendix V. I t can be seen t h a t i n 1975, c a l f and year-l i n g p r i c e s were low r e l a t i v e t o those of 1976 and 1977 where p r o j e c t i o n s showed onl y a modest upward trend„in the l a t t e r y e a r s . 4.2 The Growth Process o f the Base Ranch The growth process of a ranch n e c e s s i t a t e s a c q u i r i n g c o n t r o l of a d d i t i o n a l resources which w i l l continue to generate r e t u r n s i n excess of t h e i r c o s t , and which w i l l add t o the p r e s e n t value of the f i r m . To measure growth, r a t e of change i n owner's e q u i t y may be examined. Owner's withdrawals f o r the d e s c r i p t i v e / b u d g e t i n g case were $4,000 per annum. In a d d i t i o n taxes have not been taken i n t o account.''" Given t h a t the owner i s s u b j e c t t o a p r o g r e s -s i v e tax r a t e and i f consumption i s more than $4,000, the average change i n owner's e q u i t y of -.006% may be a somewhat c o n s e r v a t i v e estimate. One may e f f e c t i v e l y p o r t r a y the growth process of the Base Ranch by u s i n g a model i n which growth i n e q u i t y i s the dependent v a r i a b l e . By u s i n g accounting i d e n t i t i e s developed by Baker & Hopkins (1969), a f t e r tax p r o f i t s f o r a f i r m i n any time p e r i o d are d e f i n e d as: P = (rA-iD) (1-t) where P = a f t e r - t a x p r o f i t s a v a i l a b l e f o r consumption and/or savings A = t o t a l a s s e t s ''"Given a net income of approximately ±$6,000 the tax rate would be relatively low. - 104 -D = t o t a l l i a b i l i t i e s r = the net rate of return on t o t a l assets i n the firm i = the average in t e r e s t rate paid on debt t = the rate of income taxation. When the after-tax p r o f i t s are reduced by proprietor with-drawals, the savings or growth i n equity i s expressed as: g = (rA-iD) (1-t) (1-c) (1) where g = % savings or grwoth i n equity c = proprietor withdrawals (% of net income). The rate of growth of equity i s then expressed as: G = AE = rA-iD (1-t) (1-c) (2) E E where G = the growth rate: annual percentage change i n equity E = equity or net worth AE = change i n equity. Taking into consideration the use of borrowed c a p i t a l to supplement equity c a p i t a l and modifying equation ( f i n a n c i a l leverage) to d i r e c t l y incorporate the leverage r a t i o (L = D/E) equation (2) may be rewritten: G = [L(r-i)+r]k (3) where L = D/E k = (1-t) (1-c) Equation (3) incorporates a l l important factors that are used i n analyzing the growth of a farm. The equation combines the balance sheet (A,D,E), the income statement ( r , i ) , as well as specifying a rate of reinvestment through external cash withdrawals ( c , t ) . - 105 -The application of equation (3) to the Base Ranch for 1975 r e s u l t s i n an annual growth rate of -2.5%, calculated as follows: G = t.37(-.00204-.09)-.00204] (.95) (.75) = (-.02570) (4) = -.02570 = -2.57% In equation (4) the following parameters were used: L = .37 r = -.204% i = 9% t = 5% c = 25% Applying the same calculations over the three year period the average change i n owner's equity was -1.21%. This implies that over the three projected years of the model the owner can expect his equity i n the business to be reduced by an average of 1.21% per year. There i s a close relationship between leverage (L) and the rate of return on assets (r) and t h e i r e f f e c t on firm growth given the other variables (c,t, & i) of the growth equation. If the rate of return exceeds the i n t e r e s t rate and other variables remain constant, increases i n f i n a n c i a l leverage w i l l increase the rate of growth. In the Base Ranch case additional borrowing to finance investments would not accelerate the rate of growth. The question most l i k e l y be asked by the owner i s how can he finance a - 106 -s u f f i c i e n t number of promising investment a l t e r n a t i v e s t o i n c r e a s e h i s r a t e of growth. Given the u n s a t i s f a c t o r y growth r a t e and income p o s i t i o n o f the Base Ranch as p r e s e n t l y s t r u c t u r e d , d i f f e r e n t a l t e r n a t i v e s were t e s t e d u s i n g the o p t i o n s of the model: A l t e r n a t i v e 1 - The f i n a n c i a l p o s i t i o n of the ranch may be improved by r e o r g a n i z i n g feed r e l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s on the ranch. T h i s w i l l be t e s t e d u s i n g the crop p a r t i a l o p t i m i z a -t i o n r o u t i n e of the model t o be d e s c r i b e d . A l t e r n a t i v e 2 - The f i n a n c i a l p o s i t i o n of the ranch may be improved by r e o r g a n i z i n g the l i v e s t o c k r e l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s i n the ranch. T h i s w i l l be t e s t e d by u s i n g the l i v e s t o c k p a r t i a l o p t i m i z a t i o n r o u t i n e of the model. A l t e r n a t i v e 3 - The f i n a n c i a l p o s i t i o n of the ranch may be improved by r e o r g a n i z i n g both the feed and l i v e s t o c k a c t i v i t i e s . T h i s w i l l be t e s t e d by u s i n g the o p t i m i z a t i o n r o u t i n e of the model. A l t e r n a t i v e 4 - The f i n a n c i a l p o s i t i o n of the Base Ranch may be improved by e n r o l l i n g i n a government income assurance program. This - 107 -w i l l be tested using the budgeting option of the model. Each of the model options to be used a f f e c t the bound levels of a c t i v i t i e s i n d i f f e r e n t ways. For example using the optimization option the bounds placed on a c t i v i t i e s are removed almost e n t i r e l y , whereas i n other options some bounds are removed and some are not. This manipulation of the bound levels under d i f f e r e n t user options i s summarized below i n Table 4.8 and further discussed i n the sections that follow. Table 4.8. Bound Levels As Set Under Various Options Tested. User Model Options - Bound Levels Model A c t i v i t i e s Budgeting Crop Livestock Optimization FEED Opening Stock Upper Upper Upper Upper Grown Fixed Upper Fixed Upper Purchases Lower Free Lower Free Sales Fixed Free Fixed Free Closing Stock Free Free Free Free LIVESTOCK Opening Stock Fixed Fixed Upper Upper Purchases Fixed Fixed Free Free Sales Fixed Fixed Free Free Closing Stock Free Free Lower Lower FINANCIAL Cash Opening Stock Upper Upper Upper Upper Borrowing Upper Upper Upper Upper Overhead Expenses Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed - 108 -4.3 Experimentation With Model Options The reports generated and analyzed thus far are the r e s u l t of a predetermined farm plan (the d e s c r i p t i v e / budgeting option); decisions with regard to levels of feed-ing, cropping practices, purchase and sales of livestock were predetermined. The following section w i l l evaluate the various alternatives mentioned above and attempt to i d e n t i f y the most p r o f i t a b l e management strategy to follow. 4.3.1 Alternative 1: The Feeding Option The problem se t t i n g of alternative 1 i s to improve the feed management program of the Base Ranch by selecting a better' plan determined.through p a r t i a l optimization. It i s only a p a r t i a l l y optimum plan i n that the livestock a c t i v i t i e s remain at levels s p e c i f i e d by the rancher. The usefulness of such a p a r t i a l optimization i s to answer questions often asked by the farm manager. For example: 1) Given that he wishes to keep his herd size constant, what acreage of crops and hay must be produced to meet herd feeding requirements and crop or hay sales? 2) Which i s the better option; to grow hay on rented land or to buy hay? 3) Would a more intensive cropping system improve the f i n a n c i a l p o s i t i o n of the ranch? The operator s p e c i f i e d i n table 4 (Appendix 1) that 205 acres of mixed hay were i n production and an additional - 109 -50 acres were rented. The levels of these a c t i v i t i e s and s e l l i n g a c t i v i t i e s of feed were fixed i n the d e s c r i p t i v e / budgeting procedure. Under alterantive 1 the growing of crops on rented land i s no longer a fixed a c t i v i t y . Likewise, the buying and s e l l i n g l e v e l s of feed are not predetermined. The bound l e v e l of mixed hay grown on the ranch's own land was set at an upper l e v e l , thus, i n the short run, adjustments to feeding lev e l s would occur on rented land and not on the farm's own land which i s already seeded. Livestock and f i n a n c i a l conditions remained>as sp e c i f i e d i n the descriptive/budgeting procedure. The composition of rations, t h e i r l e v e l s and length of feeding period^remained the same. An alternative approach to the problem being analyzed would expand the crop and hay a c t i v -i t i e s and the rations themselves to include any a c t i v i t y that i s p r a c t i c a l l y feasible on the ranch concerned. This approach would represent a longer-run plan i n that crop, haying and feeding alternatives would be selected and these may require replanting of perenial feeds and/or new machinery requirements. The r e s u l t s reported under alternative 1 represent a plan under which cropping and haying a c t i v i t i e s are confined to those a c t i v i t i e s presently engaged i n by the rancher. A summary of the levels of some of the a c t i v -i t i e s under the descriptive budgeting and feed/crop options i s presented i n Table 4.9. The feed management practices as determined by the farm manager are very close to the plan - 110 -as determined by the p a r t i a l optimization procedure. For example the same acreage of mixed hay was grown i n 1975. Sales of hay however were eliminated. Net farm income did improve marginally over the years, as did owner's equity and cash at the bank. Table 4.9. Descriptive Budgeting vs Feed P a r t i a l Optimization of Base Ranch Base Ranch Crop/Feed Option Mixed Hay Purchased (Tons) 1975 Sold (Tons) 30 20 0 7 Mixed Hay Sales Revenue 1975 $ 1976 $ 1977 $ Mixed Hay Produced 1975 (Tons) Net Farm Income 19 75 $ 1976 $ Farm Bank Total Crops Inventory Owner's Equity 1977 $ 1975 $ 1976 $ 1977 $ 1975 $ 1975 $ 1976 $ 1977 $ 1,200 1,200 375 735 -876 6,377 6,014 36,630 31,377 25,631 38,804 313,714 316,212 318,345 396 1*398 623 735 -592 6,575 6,261 38,076 33,021 27,522 37,642 313,998 316,693 319,075 From Table 4.9 one may conclude that the Base Ranch manage-ment strategy i n regard to the cropping a c t i v i t i e s of the farm are very near optimal. - I l l -No.te t h a t under the feed p a r t i a l o p t i m i z a t i o n p r o -cedure the model was l i m i t e d t o the crops grown i n the d e s c r i p t i v e / b u d g e t i n g procedure, a l l p o s s i b l e g r a i n and hay combinations were not t e s t e d . T h i s i s not u n r e a l i s t i c under normal ranch c o n d i t i o n s because the t y p i c a l ranch u s u a l l y has the c a p a b i l i t y of growing three t o f o u r d i f f e r e n t crops, given environmental and other c o n s t r a i n t s . For example a l f a l f a i s seeded f o r three t o f o u r years so the farm manager would not c o n s i d e r growing corn i n the second year of the model i f a l f a l f a was seeded i n the f i r s t year. To t e s t f o r d i f f e r e n t feed a l t e r n a t i v e s more wid e l y a new i n p u t data f o r c r o p s , d i f f e r e n t machinery expenses, and d i f f e r e n t r a t i o n s p e c i f i c a t i o n s are r e q u i r e d . The beef package c o u l d be improved to a l l o w f o r t o t a l feed o p t i m i z a -t i o n by i n c o r p o r a t i n g a s t a n d a r d i z e d data s u b r o u t i n e . For example on the i n p u t form the rancher s p e c i f i e s t h a t he has the f l e x i b i l i t y o f growing many d i f f e r e n t crops given h i s c a p i t a l and environmental c o n d i t i o n s . A s t a n d a r d i z e d data s u b r o u t i n e would then take t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n and determine y i e l d , c o s t s , l i v e s t o c k r a t i o n s , l i v e s t o c k weight g a i n , and i n s e r t an a p p r o p r i a t e a^_. value i n the model matrix f o r a l l crop and f e e d i n g a c t i v i t i e s . An o p t i m i z a t i o n over a l l crop and f e e d i n g p o s s i b i l i t i e s c o u l d then be determined". - 112 -4.3.2 Alternative 2: The Livestock Option Under the livestock production p a r t i a l optimization option, the number and class of livestock to be sold or bought are to be determined taking into account the associated costs of keeping the animal over a s p e c i f i e d time period and the revenue generated from i t s sale. Feed production a c t i v -i t i e s remain as the farm manager s p e c i f i e d for the Base Ranch s i t u a t i o n . The present management practices i n the Base Ranch s i t u a t i o n for livestock involved: 1) keeping enough replacement heifers to f u l f i l l the d e f i c i t by c u l l i n g 2) s e l l i n g weaned calves i n the F a l l 3) carry over calves for winter and s e l l i n g them a year l a t e r as long-yearlings 4)1 purchasing a l l b u l l s . Under the livestock p a r t i a l optimiza-t i o n procedure bounds were removed from livestock s e l l i n g a c t i v i t i e s for the three years. However r e s t r i c t i o n s were placed on the c l o s i n g stock numbers at the end of the t h i r d year thus avoiding the problem of a n t i c i p a t i n g future values for livestock and beyond the horizon of the three year period. If the c l o s i n g value placed on livestock i s too low and i f cl o s i n g stock numbers were allowed to remain free the model would s e l l a l l livestock i n the f i n a l time period rather than carry them over another winter since income generating a c t i v i t i e s were not present i n the following time period. Thus, the closing stock numbers would not have to be deter-mined i f accurate inventory valuation was possible. The problem of f i x i n g the l e v e l of c l o s i n g livestock numbers - 113 -was determined through solving the model and noting the r a i s i n g of long-yearlings i n the f i r s t two years entered the basis. Consequently, i n the r e s u l t s reported closing livestock numbers included calves that would be sold as long yearlings i n the f a l l period following the l a s t time period i n the model. The livestock p a r t i a l optimization procedure can answer many d i f f e r e n t questions, for example 1) given the prices of d i f f e r e n t livestock classes and the ranch's p a r t i c u l a r resource base, what i s the most p r o f i t -able class of animal to raise and s e l l ? or 2) should the ranch winter more animals given the price of winter feed? S e l l i n g of livestock under the livestock p a r t i a l optimiza-t i o n option i s asospecified to take place i n the season chosen by the rancher. The prices of c a t t l e are based on Calgary stockyards averages i n 1975 and for 1976, 1977 prices were projected from ( S t a t i s t i c s Canada Livestock Market Outlook, January, 1976). A comparison of the r e s u l t s for the Base Ranch s i t u a t i o n and the livestock p a r t i a l optimization procedure i s presented i n Table 4.10. Under the livestock p a r t i a l optimization procedure s e l l i n g of long yearlings rather than weaned calves was preferred. Keeping more livestock over winter required more feed. - 114 -Table 4.10. Descriptive Budgeting vs. Livestock P a r t i a l Optimization Livestock Sales Livestock Base Ranch P a r t i a l Optimization ($/Unit) Number Hd. Total Number Hd. Total ($) ($) Livestock Sales: Heifer Calves 1975 116 86 9,976 0 0 1976 156 90 14,040 0 0 1977 160 90 14,400 0 0 Steer Calves 1975 171 87 14,877 19 3,249 1976 198 90 17,820 31 6 ,139 1977 202 90 18,225 30 6,075 Yearling Heifers 1975 217 30 6 ,510 30 6 ,510 1976 279 30 8,370 116 32,369 1977 286 30 8,603 120 34,410 Yearling Steers 1975 297 60 17,820 60 17,820 1976 330 60 19,800 128 42,092 1977 330 60 19,800 119 39,269 A summary of the f i n a n c i a l implications of a revised livestock system i s shown i n Table 4.11. Owner's equity improved over the three year period r e s u l t i n g i n a net i n -crease of approximately $2,000, that i s , changing from approxi-mately $318,300 to approximately $320,000. The livestock p a r t i a l optimization option placed severe drain on cash and increased livestock expenses markedly. More weaned calves were wintered than normal and as a r e s u l t feed had to be purchased to cover the extra feeding. For example i n the - 115 -Base Ranch plans i n the f i r s t year, only 30 tons of mixed hay was purchased, whereas i n the livestock option 179 tons of mixed hay was purchased. In addition, i n the f i r s t year $11,534 worth of barley was purchased i n the livestock option whereas only $6,974 of barley was purchased for the Table 4.11. Comparison of Base vs Livestock P a r t i a l Optimization - Selected F i n a n c i a l Statements Livestock Base Ranch P a r t i a l Optimization ($) ($) Total Livestock Expenses 1975 24,532 40,285 1976 21,758 38,608 1977 22,484 39,651 Total Livestock Inventory 1975 128,530 153,875 1976 128,530 152,774 1977 128,530 152,980 Farm Bank 1975 36,630 -727 1976 31,377 -2,266 1977 25,631 -6,453 Net Farm Income 1975 -876 -3,198 1976 6,377 8,991 1977 6,014 7,778 Owner's Equity 1975 313,714 311,392 1976 316,212 316,503 1977 318,345 320,401 Base Ranch. Referring to Table 4.7 and comparing i t with the livestock summary presented i n Table 4.12 i t i s apparent that s e l l i n g yearlings i s preferred. Table 4.12,. L i v e s t o c k Count, P a r t i a l O p t i m i z a t i o n Procedure FARM! =Q | NAME: THE BASE RANCH (LIVESTOCK PARTIAL OPTIMIZATION) * * * YEAR 1 LIVESTOCK COUNT (MO.HO) * * * OPEN WINTER CLOSE SPRING CLOSE SUMMER CLOSE FALL CLOSE COWS STOCK PURCH SALE STOCK .PURCH SALE STOCK PUP.CH S A L E OEATH STOCK PURCH SALE STOCK 3 0 0 . 0 . 0 . 3 0 0 . \ 0 . 0 . 3Q0. 0 . 0 . 0 . 3 0 0 . 0 . 0 . 3 0 0 . H E I C = R CALVES 60 . 0 . 0 . 6 0 . 0 . 0 . 60 . 0 . 0 . 4 . 146 . 0. 0 . 146 . STEEP. C A L V C S • 6 0 . 0 . 0 . 60 . o. • 0 . 60 . 0 . 0 . 3 . 1 4 7 . 0 . 1 9 . 127 . 9RS0 HEIFERS 30 . 0 . 0 . 3 0 . 0 . 0 . 30. 0. 0 . 0 . •30 . 0 . 0 . 3 0 . YESRL ING H- IFERS 30 . 0. 0 . 30 . 0 . 0 . 3 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 6 0 . 0 . 3 0 . 3 0 . YEARL ING STEERS 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 6 0 . 0 . 6 0 . 0 . BULLS 1 6 . C . 0 . 1 6 . 0 . 0 . 16. C . . 0 . 0 . 16. 4. 4 . 16 . YEARLING F<=cn = o$ 0 . 0 . 0 . 0. 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 2 - Y " OLO FFJCERS 0 . 0 . 0 . 0. 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . CULLS 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 3 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . » * * LIVESTOCK COUNT (NO .HD) « * * YEAR 2 Y E A P. 3 CLOSE CLOS = COWS PURCH SALE STOCK PURCH SALE STOCK 0 . 0 . 3 0 0 . 0 . 0 . 300 . H c I F i R C - U V ' S 0. 0 . 1 5 0 . 0 . 0 . 150. S T E F ^ CALVES 0 . 31 . 1 1 9 . 0 . 3 0 . 120 . 90CD H E I F c o s 0 . 0 . 30 . 0 . 0 . 3 0 . YES"L TNG HE ! F C T > S 0 . 116. 3 0 . 0 . 1 2 0 . 3 0 . Y E 4 C L I N G STEERS 0 . 128 . 0 . 0 . 1 1 9 . 0 . •3ULLS 4 . 4 . 1 6 . 4 . 4 . 16. YS&RLING FFEOFRS 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 2-YR OLD F E C D E R S 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . C J L L 3 0 . 3 0 . 0 . 0 . 3 0 . 0 . EXECUTION T C O M I N 4 T ED - 117 -In addition to the p a r t i a l livestock optimization described above, the model may explore other cow-calf, cow-yearling s e l l i n g a l t e r natives. As mentioned the l i v e -stock management strategy of the Base Ranch i s to s e l l some weaned calves i n the f a l l and long yearling feeders i n late summer. However, the ranch may also have the c a p a b i l i t i e s of s e l l i n g short yearlings as feeders i n the spring or s e l l i n g finished slaughter c a t t l e . In fact with low 1975 prices for weaned calves and high grain prices facing feed-l o t operators, putting on extra weight on the c a l f before i t was sold was a common practice. Figure 4.2 presents .a summary of c a t t l e feeding alternatives that a rancher who i s also prepared to feed may follow. Given the various combinations shown i n Figure 4.2 i t was possible to evaluate some of these options, namely; when should animals be sold, (1) as weaned calves i n the f a l l , or (2) sold as short yearlings (feeders) i n the spring, or (3) ca r r i e d through and sold as long yearlings i n the f a l l , or (4) fed to the finished slaughter c a t t l e stage. The second alternative evaluated considered whether weaned calves should be fed a growing ration through winter and be sold i n the early spring at about 690 lbs. l i v e weight as steers and 645 l b s . as h e i f e r s . Calves (450lbs) Nov. 1974 1) Sell calves 2) Finishing ration — 275 days 3) Growing ration over winter 4 5 0 - 6 3 0 lbs. May 1975 July 1975 Nov 1975 Jan 1976 I)Sell light feeders 630 lbs. 2) High energy ration® 630 1050lbs (180days) 3) On grass in spr ing^^<»a)Sel las long yearlings 6 3 0 - 8 5 5 l b s ®C 855 lbs © b) High energy ration (8Qdays)« 8 5 5 - 1 0 5 0 lbs. F i g u r e 4.2. C a t t l e Feeding A l t e r n a t i v e s . Source: United G r a i n Grower (Feb. 1976). - 119 -For the t h i r d alternative calves are fed through the winter on a growing ration as short yearlings but instead of being sold i n the spring they are pastured through the second summer. Long yearlings are then sold o f f grass i n the late._summer (888 lbs. for steers and 806 lbs. for h e i f e r s ) . In the fourth al t e r n a t i v e long yearlings are fed for 60 days during the early f a l l . The yearlings should.gain about 3 l b s . per day as steers and 2.7 lbs. per day as h e i f e r s . Market weights should average 1,078 for steers and 931 lbs. for h e i f e r s . These four alternatives were evaluated and the solu-t i o n obtained i s presented i n Table 4.1-3;. The optimal solution indicates that r a i s i n g and s e l l i n g heavier animals i s preferred. In year 1 most of the weaned calves were wintered and sold as yearlings the following year. In the f i r s t year 30 heifers and 60 steers were finished. A comparison of selected f i n a n c i a l measures between the Base Ranch under the descriptive budgeting option and choices from the above mentioned four alternatives i s presented i n Table 4.1,4. Under t h i s option Owner's Equity increased by approximately $12,000 over the base ranch s i t u a t i o n and by approximately $10,000 over the previous livestock plan. It i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that options involving livestock herd build-up strains the l i q u i d i t y of the ranch due to the fact that for one entire year v i r t u a l l y no income from livestock i s forthcoming since calves are raised to heavier weights. One may conclude that i f the ranch management Table 4.13. L i v e s t o c k Count Under Feeding and F i n i s h i n g A l t e r n a t i v e s . eARM<EP) NAME! THE BASF RANCH I SHORT/LONG/F INI SHED YEARLING ALTERNATIVES) * * * YEAR 1 LIVESTOCK COUNT (NO.HOI * * * COWS » HeIF=R CALVES STE=R C1LVFS 9RE0 H c IFPRS YEARLING HE IFCR S YFABLING STEERS 3ULLS YE4RLING FccntRS 2-to CLO FEEDERS CULLS 0P=N WINTER CLOSE SPRING CLOSE SUMMER CLCSE FALL CLOSE STOCK PURCH SALE STOCK PURCH SAL? STCCK PURCH SALE DEATH STOCK PURCH SALE STOCK 300. 0. 0. 300. 0. 0. 300. 0. 0. 0. 300. 0. 0. 300. 60. 0. 0. 60. 0. 0. 60. 0. 0. 4. 146. 0. 0* 146. 60. 0. 0. 60. 0. 0. 60. 0. 0. 3. 147. 0. 8. 139. 30. 0. 0. 30. 0.. 0. 30. 0. 0. 0. 30. 0. 0. 30. 30. 0. 0. 30. 0. 0. 30. 0. 0. 0. 60. 0. 30. 30. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 60. 0. 60. 0. 16. 0. 0. 16. 0. 0. 16. 0. 0. 0. 16. 4. 4. 16. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 30. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. C?ws HF!F;» CALVES STE=1 C 6 L V C S R»ED H c IFFRS Y*»RL I*'C HETF«S YEARLING STFFRS RIALS Y*'»RL TNG F"OE°S 2-YR CLD FFFCEPS CULLS EXECUTION TEPMINSTFO • • • LIVESTOCK COUNT (NO.HD) • * * YEAR 2 C! OSE YEAR 3 CLOSE PURCH SALE STCCK PURCH SALE STOCK 0. 0. 300. 0. 0. 300. . 0. 0. 150. 0. 0. 150. 0. 19. 131. 0. 30. 120. 0. 0. 30.. 0. 0. 30. 0. 116. 30. 0. 120. 30. 0. 139. 0. 0. 131. 0. 4. 4. 16. 4. 4. 16. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 30. 0. 0. 30. 0. - 121 -strategy i s to hold more livestock for winter feeding, adequate l i q u i d i t y i s e s s e n t i a l . Liquid assets include cash and other f i n a n c i a l assets. Hiring contingent reserves i n the form of insurance, and holding c r e d i t reserves of unused borrowing capacity may represent addi-t i o n a l sources of l i q u i d i t y The best livestock option therefore i s f e a s i b l e from a production view, but may be less desirable given the f i n a n c i a l r i s k point of view. Table 4.14. Selected Fi n a n c i a l Measures - Base Ranch vs. Cattle Feeding Alternatives Cattle Feeding Base Ranch Alternatives Net Farm Income 1975 $ -876 5,791 1976 $ 6,377 9,003 1977 $ 6,014 9,243 Farm Bank 1975 $ 36,630 -710 1976 $ 31,377 -2,248 1977 $ 25 ,631 -2,569 Owner's Equity 1975 $ 313,714 320,381 1976 $ 316,212 325,504 1977 $ 318,345 330,867 In using the livestock option of the model more informa-t i o n i s required than i s documented i n the Base Ranch input form i f a l l livestock feeding alternatives are taken into consideration. For example rations, weights and s e l l i n g prices must be s p e c i f i e d . The livestock plan chosen above would no doubt have a d i f f e r e n t solution i f market prices of feed and livestock were changed. - 122 -4.3.3 Alternative 3; The Optimal Plan How would the plan of the ranch change given the most p r o f i t a b l e management strategy i s sought? This question would be answered by allowing the model to select the most p r o f i t a b l e feed and livestock production combination. It should be emphasized that the optimization i s not " t o t a l " i n the strictest sense of the word where a l l a c t i v i t i e s i n the model are free. The optimization procedure b a s i c a l l y i s a combination of the crop and livestock p a r t i a l optimization routines. The r e s t r i c t i o n s and conditions placed upon the crop and livestock p a r t i a l optimizations previously mentioned are applicable to the optimization a l t e r n a t i v e . Consequently the optimization alternative should indicate a more p r o f i t -able plan than eit h e r the crop or livestock p a r t i a l optimiza-tions . A comparison of the Base Ranch s i t u a t i o n and the farm plan as described through the optimizing option i s presented i n Table 4.15. Using the optimization routine the Base Ranch improves i t s over a l l f i n a n c i a l p o s i t ion. Again i t must be noted that using the optimizing procedure heavy s t r a i n i s placed on the l i q u i d i t y of the ranch. The farm bank was i n a negative p o s i t i o n for a l l years. In each year the optimization routine improves the owner's equity position by approximately $5,000. The Base - 123 -Ranch using the descriptive/budgeting option projected that owner's equity at the end of 1977 would be $318,345 whereas the optimization routine projects the figure to be $331,603. Table 4.15. Descriptive Budgeting vs. Optimization Selected Fi n a n c i a l Measures Optimization Base Ranch Option ($) ($) Farm Bank 1975 36,630 -698 1976 31,377 -2,237 1977 25,631 -1,870 Total Crop Inventory 1975 38,804 55,114 Total Livestock Inventory 1975 128,530 156,335 1976 128,530 155,603 1977 128,530 152,980 Total Assets 1975 429,314 436,100 1976 418 ,812 428 ,580 1977 407,945 421,203 Owner's Equity 1975 313,714 320,500 1976 316,212 325,980 1977 318,345 331,603 The t o t a l asset position of the ranch however has been decreasing using the optimization option. The t o t a l d o l l a r figure was $436,100 i n 1975 and $42.1,203 i n 1977 an approxi-mate $15,000 decrease. The decrease i s mainly attributed to the poor farm bank position and the decrease i n t o t a l l i v e -stock inventory. Total livestock inventory has been projected to decrease by approximately $4 ,000 over the last two years. - 124 -It i s important to note that although the optimiza-t i o n routine improves the f i n a n c i a l picture of the ranch, i t does so only at the r i s k of the ranch being non-liquid. 4.3.4 Alternative 4: Farm Income Assurance Payments The beef producers of B.C. i n 1974 had the opportunity to enter into a p r o v i n c i a l government income assurance program. The concept of the program i s that ranchers pay premiums to the p r o v i n c i a l government when market prices f a l l above the calculated cost-of-production for animals sold and receive indemnities from the program when the market price f a l l below the cost-of-production. The program was imple-mented A p r i l 1, 1974 and i s scheduled to terminate on December 31, 197 8. The B.C. Cattleman's Association through the B.C. Federation of Agriculture has negotiated with the B.C. Department of Agriculture and arrived at a 1974 estimated cost-of-production for calves sold of $0.77 per pound and $0,632 per pound for yearlings. Producers pay $0.08 per pound as a premium into the fund on calves sold and $0.06 per pound on yearlings sold. In order to evaluate the e f f e c t of t h i s income assurance program on the returns to the rancher, the s e l l i n g prices of animals for the Base Ranch s i t u a t i o n were increased to correspond to income assurance l e v e l s . A comparison of the market price and the price paid by the program i s presented in Table 4.16. - 125 -Table 4. 16. Net Return to Rancher Assurance Program Under Income Average Weight Market Price 1975 Calgary Net Indemnity Paid to Rancher (Indemnity Minus Premium) (lb) ($/lb) ($/lb) Heifer Calves 400 .29 .592 Steer Calves 450 .38 .604 Yearling Heifers 775 .28 .482 Yearling Steers 825 .36 .498 The indemnities paid i n 1976 and 1977 (last two years of the model) were considered s i m i l a r to those of 1975. The change i n returns to the rancher was evaluated for the Base Ranch s i t u a t i o n , with no changes other than the s e l l i n g prices of calves and yearlings. Selected f i n a n c i a l measures of the Base Ranch under the farm income assurance plan are pre-sented i n Table 4.17. The changes are substantial with ending owner's equity under the farm income assurance program increasing to approximately $395,000 from about $318,000. An increase i n net income per annum of approximately $22,000. The income insurance program has a considerable impact upon the f i n a n c i a l p osition of the ranch. One may conclude that i f the primary purpose of the income assurance program i s to a s s i s t the beef rancher i n times of low prices, the program i s successful. - 126 -Table 4.17. Selected F i n a n c i a l Measures of Base Ranch Under Income Assurance Program Income Assurance Base Ranch Program ($) ($) Farm Bank 1975 36,630 67,316 1976 31,377 85,600 1977 25,631 102,445 Net Farm Income 1975 -876 29,814 1976 6,377 29,914 1977 6,014 28,605 Owner's Equity 1975 313,714 344,400 1976 316,212 370,435 1977 318,345 395,160 4.4 Summary and Discussion of the Alternative Plans In the previous sections an attempt was made to demon-strate the model's c a p a b i l i t i e s . The f i r s t test of the model was of a descriptive/budgeting nature using a representative farm. The various reports generated were documented and discussed. I t was found that the farm organization as budgeted showed negative growth for the three projected years. Alternative plans were formulated hypothesizing that the f i n a n c i a l p o sition of the ranch could be improved i f changes in.:the farm plan were made. Four alternatives were described i n section 4.3 and the res u l t s of the various plans are presented i n Table 4.18. It can be seen from Table 4.18 that.using the growth formula as described i n section 4.3 as a c r i t e r i o n , the f i n a n c i a l p o sition of the Base Ranch coilld be improved using Tabic 4.18. Financial Summary of Model Options Tested. Option Tested Descriptive Budgeting Feed Partial Option Livestock Partial Option Research Description of Option Farm Plan Is Totally Specified By Manager Feed and Livestock Maximized for Profit Subject to Financial Restrictions Livestock Specified Feed Only Maximized Crop Specified Livestock Only Maximized Income Assurance Plan Applied (5) IS) (?) (5) ($) Farm Bank 1975 1976 1977 36,630 31,377 25,631 -698 -2,237 -1,870 38,076 33,021 27,522 -727 -2,266 -6,453 67,316 85,600 102,4 45 Ket Farm Income . 1975 -876 1976 6,377 1977 6,014 5,910 9,360 9,503 -592 6,575 6,261 -3,198 8,991 7,778 29,814 29,914 28,605 Owner's Equity 1975 1976 1977 313,714 316,212 318,345 320,500 • 325,980 331,603 313,998 316,693 319,075 311,392 316,503 320,401 344,400 370,4 35 395,160 3 Yr. Average Projected Rate Of Growth* -1.21% -0.22% -1.02% -1.06% 3.88% 'Application of growth formula in Section 4.2. - 128 -the model options described. It may be concluded that under an improved livestock p r i c i n g structure (the income assurance program) gains are greatest. This plan also involved the least amount of r i s k to the farm's l i q u i d i t y p o s i t i o n . That plan selected under the t o t a l optimization option resulted i n an ending owner's equity of $331,603, representing an increase of approxi-mately $15,000 more than the Base Ranch s i t u a t i o n and approximately $13,500 more than the other two options considered. The plan necessitated a switch from s e l l i n g calves to yearlings and required a negative cash income pos i t i o n i n the f i r s t two years. The plan may not be acceptable to the farm manager, i f adequate c r e d i t reserves are not available. The feed and livestock p a r t i a l optimization options are s i m i l a r i n f i n a n c i a l aspects when analyzed by the growth formula. The livestock p a r t i a l optimization routine indicated a negative average growth of 1.06% whereas the feed p a r t i a l optimization figure was a negative 1.0 2%. At the end of the t h i r d year the livestock p a r t i a l optimization projection for owner's equity was approximately $1,400 more than the feed option. However there was a considerable difference i n the farm bank po s i t i o n of the two options. The livestock routine indicated an increasingly negative figure for the three projected years (-727 i n 1975 to -6,453 i n 1977), whereas the feed p a r t i a l optimization - 129 -routine although i n a decreasing position remained p o s i t i v e over the three projected years (38,876 i n 1975 to 27,522 in 19 77). The s t r a i n on cash using the livestock option may be attributed to the po l i c y of holding more calves over winter and s e l l i n g them as yearlings. The best option however depends on many things, including the farm manager's preferences, prices and costs. The options tested have both good and bad points. The use-fulness of the model i s apparent when the farm manager may use the model to test combinations of labour, management, c a p i t a l and production systems to his p a r t i c u l a r preferences and circumstances. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, PRINCIPAL FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The objective of t h i s study was the development of a computerized farm management information system that allows commercial beef ranchers to evaluate and thereby improve t h e i r economic po s i t i o n . More s p e c i f i c a l l y t h i s study accomplished the following objectives: 1) I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the more important planning problems facing cow-calf and cow-yearling operators. 2) Development of a model that represents the ranch-ing firm i n d i f f e r e n t areas of Canada, in d i c a t i n g the economic v i a b i l i t y of options as solutions to some of the problems i d e n t i f i e d . 3) Provision of a software that allows for routine use of the model. 4) V e r i f i c a t i o n of the key management information system on d i f f e r e n t ranching structures. 5) Evaluation of alternative management strategies. 5.1 Summary Chapter I of t h i s thesis introduced the problem setting, defined the objectives of the study, and a research procedure was outlined. Chapter II reviewed related studies and i n d i -cated the conceptual model developed. The research procedure - 131 -adopted i n t h i s study was to analyze management alternatives through the use of a l i n e a r programming model. The model developed and described i n d e t a i l i n Chapter III was concep-t u a l l y based on the Hicksian and Modigiani and Cohen notion regarding the dynamic planning behaviour of the firm and solutions thereof must represent a p r a c t i c a l solution capable of being implemented-in a r e a l world setting. Model experi-mentation was undertaken by the use of a representative farm. The reports presented i n Chapter IV include an inventory report, farm income statement, a projected cash flow summary, a three year statement of assets, l i a b i l i t i e s and owner's equity, a f i n a n c i a l summary statement and a livestock count summary. Alternatives were considered and tested as to how the p r o f i t a b i l i t y of the representative farm could be improved through reorganization. 5.2 P r i n c i p a l Findings and Conclusions The development and use of the beef management planning and information system led to the following p r i n c i p a l findings and conclusions: 1) Through contact with farm managers and d i s t r i c t a g r i c u l t u r a l i s t s i n 1975, important planning and decision problems facing ranchers were i d e n t i f i e d . The problems most frequently mentioned were of a feed production and livestock sales nature. The most commonly encountered feed problem was that - 132 -of making better use of a lim i t e d acreage of hayland. Generally, farm managers tended to balance winter feeding requirements for l i v e -stock with feed production and thereby avoided co s t l y feed purchases. Livestock related pro-blems mainly dealt with determining the most p r o f i t a b l e livestock class to s e l l given d i f f e r -ent market prices for various livestock classes i n d i f f e r e n t time periods. 2) A multiperiod l i n e a r programming model that represents the commercial ranch, was concluded by the author to o f f e r greater advantages and fewer disadvantages than a recursive programming approach or other non-analytical simulation methods. The lin e a r programming model developed in t h i s work i s constructed with six unequal time periods representing three years. Most classes of feed and a l l classes of animals encountered on a ranching setting were allowed for. 3) In providing software that would allow for routine use of the model, the author used a matrix generator (FORTRAN) to assimilate information from the data deck into a l i n e a r programming matrix. This programming language was also used to i n t e r -pret and present the l i n e a r programming solution - 133 -into a format e a s i l y understood by the user. It may be concluded that these packages are presently suitable for routine use. 4) V e r i f i c a t i o n of the beef management information system was supported by the application of the model to ten case study situations. Numerous other test cases have also been solved and evaluated. The p r i n c i p a l findings i n tes t i n g the model i n the f i e l d were: (a) I n i t i a l l y there was resistance by some of the use of the computer as a management aid and likewise to t h i s application thereof. (b) In general, there appeared to be a lack of adequate physical and f i n a n c i a l information readily at hand. (c) Although f a m i l i a r with information systems the acceptance of these by the rancher has been less than wholehearted. Further education and promotion of the information system i s required. In spite of these d i f f i c u l t i e s , the conclusion i s drawn that the beef management information system developed i s a v a l i d d e s c r i p t i v e / predictive t o o l applicable to beef farm research. - 134 -R e s u l t s f o r the case study s i t u a t i o n (Base Ranch), a t y p i c a l commercial ranching o p e r a t i o n i n d i c a t e d t h a t net farm income was a l o s s o f approximately $900 i n the f i r s t year and a net farm income of approximately $6,000 i n the second and t h i r d y e a r s . The improvement i n the l a t t e r years was due t o h i g h e r l i v e s t o c k p r i c e s . In e v a l u a t i n g a l t e r n a t i v e management s t r a t e g i e s the p r o f i t a b i l i t y o f the r e p r e s e n t a -t i v e Base Ranch was improved. Four d i f f e r e n t a l t e r n a t i v e s were t e s t e d . The most p r o f i t a b l e a l t e r n a t i v e was f o r the ranch to e n r o l l i n a p r o v i n c i a l government beef income assurance program. Under t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e , the t h r e e year average p r o j e c t e d r a t e of growth was 3.88%. For the four a l t e r n a t i v e s t e s t e d , t h i s r e p r e s e n t e d the o n l y p l a n g i v i n g a p o s i t i v e r a t e of growth and the cash p o s i t i o n of the ranch remained p o s i t i v e throughout and c l o s e d w i t h a balance of $102,445 i n 1977 which d i f f e r s from a c l o s i n g balance of $25,631 under the d e s c r i p t i v e / b u d g e t i n g procedure. Net farm income remained s t a b l e a t approximately $29,000; an improvement of approximately $23,000 over the d e s c r i p t i v e / b u d g e t i n g o p t i o n . The owner's e q u i t y p o s i t i o n a t the end o f the three p r o j e c t e d years was $395,160, the h i g h e s t f o r a l l - 135 -alternatives tested. When market prices were used (instead of income assurance prices) and most feed and livestock a c t i v i t i e s of the model were optimized, a plan giving an average rate of growth of -0.22% resulted. Although negative, t h i s was better than the descriptive/budgeting's projected rate of -1.21%. Owner's equity under the optimization a l t e r n a t i v e closed i n the t h i r d year with a balance of $331,603; $318,345 for the descriptive/budgeting case. However, bank loans were necessary for a l l years under t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e . The p r i n c i p a l findings of the .: optimization, alternative as compared to the Base s i t u a t i o n was that i n the l a t t e r case, the ranch underutilized i t s crop land and sold a class of livestock that was not the most p r o f i t a b l e a l t e r n a t i v e . The conclusion was reached that the p r o f i t a b i l i t y of the ranch could improve by altering:the herd management po l i c y to s e l l i n g yearlings rather than calves given the prices s p e c i f i e d i n the model. The f i n a l two alternatives tested were p a r t i a l optimizations investigating feed and l i v e -stock management p o l i c i e s independantly. The feed p a r t i a l optimization alternative projected an average rate of growth of -1.02% whereas the livestock p a r t i a l optimizations projected -1.06%. - 1 3 6 -Both these r e s u l t s were better than the d e s c r i p t i v e / budgeting projection of -1.21%. The p a r t i a l otpimization alternatives were s i m i l a r i n t h e i r projections for owner's equity and net farm income. However, farm bank balances using the feed p a r t i a l optimization procedure remained posi t i v e and closed i n 1977 with a balance of $27,522 whereas the animal p a r t i a l optimization procedure ended with a negative balance of $6,453. The conclusion reached i n tes t i n g various alternatives using the model's f l e x i b i l i t y i s that the p r o f i t a b i l i t y of the ranch can be improved by following plans indicated by model res u l t s sum-marized i n the beef management information system. 5.3 Recommendations for Further Research As to the recommendations, experience has shown that useful models are consistently being adopted and improved. In t h i s sense the following points should be considered: 1) I t would be highly desirable to continue t e s t i n g model v a l i d i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y . Further, model va l i d a t i o n would involve increased use of the package on a wider scale by ranchers, d i s t r i c t a g r i c u l t u r a l i s t s and research personnel i n the d i f f e r e n t provinces of Canada. 2) The amount of time required to complete the input form for t h i s model varies with the model option - 137 -chosen. The descriptive/budgeting mode requires approximately 2 1/2 hours of a rancher's time, other options require l e s s . I t may be desirable to eliminate the descriptive/budgeting option and consequently eliminate some of the input require-ments. This would require the in c l u s i o n of a standardized data bank. 3) The livestock s e l l i n g a c t i v i t i e s f or the f i r s t year of the model need to be expanded on the input form. The s i t u a t i o n at present i s that the beef model matrix c a p a b i l i t i e s are li m i t e d by the si m p l i c i t y of the input form. D e t a i l i n the f i r s t year could be increased i f the input form was constructed to recognize that the average weight and price of animals sold vary throughout the year. 4) The ratio n s p e c i f i c a t i o n i n the model needs to be expanded; at present livestock ration formulae for each class of livestock are lim i t e d to three formulae. Ration s p e c i f i c a t i o n s needs to more clo s e l y portray a least cost approach. The conceptualization of the problems at present i s that livestock eat t h i s feed and that feed, t h i s should be changed so animals eat t h i s feed or that feed. - 138 -5) Elimination of cash flows on a monthly basis for the f i r s t year of the model would simplify input requirements and may thereby increase user accep-tance. A quarterly accounting procedure may be considered. 6) Presently there may be more animal classes i n the model than i s needed for use i n the Canadian ranching environment. Ten classes of livestock are allowed for. 7) The f i n a l recommendation i s that work of t h i s type can only be successful for extension work when an adequate marketing and promotion strategy i s undertaken. The key question from the rancher's viewpoint i s "What can the beef package do for me?" Consequently, the package must be profes-s i o n a l l y promoted as a business management information system and the benefits and costs thereof indicated. It i s the author's opinion that t h i s project should be continued since the benefits of a management information system which successfully aids beef ranchers i n making correct decisions could be considerable. Furthermore, even i f the package i s only p a r t i a l l y used i n an extension environ-ment, i t s use i n research may j u s t i f y i t s expenditures i f the model can provide useful information to policy makers and others learn from i t . - 139 -BIBLIOGRAPHY Baker, C. B. and Hopkin, J . A."Concepts of Finance C a p i t a l f o r a C a p i t a l Using A g r i c u l t u r e " , American J o u r n a l of  A g r i c u l t u r a l Economics, V o l . 51, No. 5, December 1969. Baumol, W. J . Economics Dynamics. New York: The MacMillan Company, Second E d i t i o n , 1964. B o e h l j e , M.D. and White, T.K. "A P r o d u c t i o n Investment D e c i s i o n Model o f Farm Firm Growth," American J o u r n a l of A g r i c u l - t u r a l Economics, V o l . 53 (1971), 467-477. Candler, W., B o e h l j e , M. and S a a t h o f f , R. Computer Software f o r Farm Management E x t e n s i o n . Am. J . Ag. Econ. 521:1, p. 71, 1970. Day, R.H. Recursive Programming and P r o d u c t i o n Response. Amsterdam: North-Holland P u b l i s h i n g Dompany, 1963. Edwards, C. "Resource F i x i t y and Farm O r g a n i z a t i o n , " J . Farm  Econ. 41:747-759, Nov. 1959. ' E i s g r u b e r , L.M. Farm Oper a t i o n S i m u l a t o r and Farm Management  D e c i s i o n E x e r i c s e . Research Progress Report No. 162. L a f a y e t t e : A g r i c u l t u r a l Experiment S t a t i o n , Purdue U n i v e r s i t y , February 1965. Harrod, R.F. Towards a Dynamic Economics. London: MacMillan and Co., L t d . , 1948. Heady, E.O. Economics of A g r i c u l t u r a l P r o d u c t i o n and Resource  Use. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , Inc., 1952 Heidhues, T. "A Recursive Programming Model of Farm Growth i n Northern Germany," J o u r n a l of Farm Economics, V o l . 48 (1966) , 668-684. H i c k s , J.R. Value and C a p i t a l . London: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . Second E d i t i o n , 1946. Hutton, R.F. A S i m u l a t i o n Technique f o r Making Management  D e c i s i o n s i n Da i r y Farming. A g r i c u l t u r a l Economics Report No. 87, U.S. Department of A g r i c u l t u r e , Economic Research S e r v i c e , February 1966. Johnson, G.L., "Some B a s i c Problems f o r Economics and S t a t i s t i -c i a n s A r i s i n g From U.S. A g r i c u l t u r a l P r i c e s , " Manchester Manchester S t a t i s t i c a l S o c i e t y , 1969. Johnson, S.R., T e f e r t i l l e r , K.R., and Moore, D.S., " S t o c h a s t i c L i n e a r Programming and F e a s i b i l i t y Problems i n Farm Growth A n a l y s i s , " J o u r n a l of Farm Economics, Vo. 4 9 (1967), 908-919. - 140 -Knight, F.H. Risk, Uncertainty and P r o f i t . • New York: Houghton, M i f f l i n Co., 1921. Lanpher, B.F. "Inventory of EDP Programs Used i n A g r i c u l -t u r a l Extension," Federal Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C, May, 1973. Loftsgard, L.D. and Heady, E.O. "Application of Dynamic Programming Models for Optimum Farm and Home Plans," Journal of Farm Economics, Vol. 41 (1959) , 51-67. Martin, J.R. and Plaxico, J.S. Polyperiod Analysis of the  Growth and Capital Accumulation of Farms i n the . Roll i n g Plains of Oklahoma and Texas. Technical B u l l e t i n 1381. Washington: Government Pr i n t i n g O f f i c e , September 1967. Modigliani, F. and Cohen, K.J. The Role of Anticipations  and Plans i n Economic Behaviour and Their Use i n  Economic Analysis and Forecasting. Pub. University of I l l i n o i s , Urbana, 1961. Naylor, T.H. and Finger, J.M. " V e r i f i c a t i o n of Computer Simulation Models," Journal of Management Science, Vol. 14, No. 2, Oct. 1967, B92-B101. Patrick, G.F. and Eisgruber, L.M. "The Impact of Managerial A b i l i t y and Capital Structure on Growth of the Farm Firm." American Journal of A g r i c u l t u r a l Economics, Vol. 50 (1968), 491-506. Reichenbach, H., The Rise of S c i e n t i f i c Discovery, j Basic Books, New York, 1951. Schaller, W.N. "Predicting Regional Crop Production, An Application of Recursive Programming," USDA, ERS Tech. B u l l . 329, 1965. Schrank, W.E. and Holt, C C . "Critique of V e r i f i c a t i o n of Computer Simulation Models," Journal of Management  Science, Vol. 14, No. 2, Oct. 1967, B-104-B-106. Shubik, M. "Simulation of the Industry and the Firm," American Economic Review, Vol. 9 (1960), 908-919. Sprowls, C. "Simulation and Management Control," Manage- ment Controls: New Directions i n Basic Research, C P . Bonini, et a l . (editors) . McGraw-Hill, New York, 1964. - 141 -Swanson, E.R. " I n t e g r a t i n g Crop and L i v e s t o c k A c t i v i t i e s i n Farm Management A c t i v i t y A n a l y s i s , " J o u r n a l of  Farm Economics, V o l . 37 (1955) 1249-1258. - 142 -APPENDIX I INPUT FORM FOR COMPUTERIZED MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM USER'S MANUAL C F A B A COMPUTERIZED FARM ANALYSIS PACKAGE FOR BEEF RANCHING DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA RETURN TO: J. D. Graham YOUR NAME-Department of Agricultural Economics University of B r i t i s h Columbia ADDRESS-Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1WS INTRODUCTION WHAT? CFAB i s a computerized farm analysis package that is spec i f i c to cow-calf/cow-yearling commercial beef ranchers. CFAB may budget through various selected options or optimize net farm income subject to the resource limits of the ranch (feed, capital). If you've ever worked through a to t a l farm budget you'll agree that a considerable amount of time and effo r t i s required. Due to the tediousness of such procedures only a limited number of alternatives are budgeted for. Plans often exist that were not considered and which could be more profitable. CFAB has the f l e x i b i l i t y of simultaneously considering a large number of input and product variables and solving for the more profitable combination. HOW? Steps involved in running CFAB are as follows: 1 RANCHER 1 RANCHERS SPECIFIC DATA £ PREFERENCES FOR ACTIVITIES r CFAB INPUT'FORM ) DATA TAKEN FROM CFAB INPUT FORM 6 PUNCHED ON TO CARDS | CARDS RUN THROUGH COMPUTER"! — c _  — | CFAB SOLUTION ) fCTAB OUTPUT FORM | OUTPUT FORM RETURNED TO" RANCHER FOR EVALUATION Since computers are l i t t l e more than high-speed calculating machines, unreliable and misleading farm plans w i l l develop i f the information given the computer i s not correct or accurate. For this reason you should always refer to the CFAB USER'S GUIDE before you f i l l i n the input form. ' USER OPTIONS You have anumber of options, open to you. This choice determines the amount of input required. Indicate Your Choice with Check (•) Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option t Option 5 • • • • Descriptive/Budgeting Option: The results for a set of predetermined decisions are budgeted. You have decided the various levels of feed and/or cropping practices and your purchases and sales of livestock and wish to budget your decisions. Optimization Option: Which crop and livestock plan w i l l maximize pro f i t over three years subject to your opening set of resources and subject to your cash require-ments needed for l i v i n g expenses. Part i a l Optimization Option - (Livestock Numbers Given): The best plan is to be determined given that the number of livestock on hand at the beginning of each winter has been predetermined. Your opening resources capacity and l i v i n g expenses are also considered. Part i a l Optimization Option - (Feed Production Given): The best plan i s to be deter-mined given the hay producing capacity of the ranch. Your opening resource capacity and l i v i n g expenses are also considered. Research Option: The bound levels of a c t i v i t i e s other than those options considered above may be manipulated. Choose one of the above options and modify bound restrictions as required. WHICH INPUT TABLES TO COMPLETE? Option 1: Complete a l l tables except f o r ce r t a i n columns i n Table 1. Option 2: Exclude: Table 2 except f o r average weight, sale p r i c e and no. died columns. Table 3 except for average weight and purchase price columns. Table 11 except f o r sale price/ton column of feeds/crops produced. - Table 12 except f o r purchase price/ton column of feeds/crops that are a v a i l a b l e f o r purchase. ^ Table 13 except f o r purchase price/ton column of feeds/crops that are a v a i l a b l e f o r purchase. Option 3: Exclude a l l tables shown i n Option 2 but complete Table 1 i n f u l l . Option 4: Exclude Table 2 and Table 3 except f o r columns indicated i n Option 2. Option 5: Choose one of the above options as appropriate. CA t a b l e 1: Livestock Inventory at the Start of the Winter Feeding Period Note 1: Option 3 allows you to predetermine the number of animals you w i l l keep on hand and feed over winter for the three year period. Hence i f Option 3 i s selected complete a l l Table 1. For a l l other options you need complete the f i r s t two columns only. Note 2: To i l l u s t r a t e the time periods of the three years chosen and to r e l a t e the l i v e s t o c k and cropping years to the f i n a n c i a l year, the following diagram i s presented: Fi n a n c i a l E Account-ing Year F i r s t Year Second Year Third Year sse ^ an. ^ Start ciosi Jan. Dec 1 j/Start Close/ /Jan. Dec.j Start Cl Jan. J Crop/Livestock Production Year Note 3: TABLE 1. LIVESTOCK INVENTORY AT THE START OF THE WINTER FEEDING PERIOD Animal Class Identification Year' One Year1 Two Year Three No. of Head (5/Head) 2 1 No. of Head 31 (§/Head) A l ^ No. of Head (s/Head) 1.011 Cows Soo 1.021 Heifer Calves (a O 1.031 Steer Calves c?o •Z OS~. 1.041 Bred Replacement Heifers 3 O / <?? 1.051 Yearling Heifers 3 O / ? 3 1.061 Yearling Steers xss 1.071 Bulls • • /OOO 1.081 Yearling Feeders 1.091 2 Year Feeders 1.101 Culls /7£-TABLE 2 LIVESTOCK SALES: YEAR 1 AaLnal Class Total No.Hd. Avg. Wt. (lb.) 21 Sale Price ($/lb) *i Sale Price ($/hd) Number of Head Sold Per Month Ko. Died Yr. 1 21 Sold i » Jan. Feb. ti Mar. si Apr. » i May i i June 21 July i i Aug. dl Sept. si Oct. ti Nov. Dec. 11 Cows 2.012 Hef. Calves H O O 2.022 F £ Str. Calves ?7 yso •3>F 2.032 3 Bred. Rep. Hef. 2.0'i2 Yr. Hef. 30 7?S . zS 2.052 30 Yr. Strs. 2.062 '5. Bulls V /ZOO . 23 2.072 V Yr. Fdrs. 2.062 2 Yr. Fdrs. 2.092 Culls 30 /coo 2.102 Livestock Sales: Year 2 Livestock Sales: Year 3 Animal Class Total No.Hd. Sold i i Avg. Wt. (lb.) i i Sale Price ($/3b.) »i Sale Price ($/hd) Animal Class Total No.Hd. . Sold »r Avg. Wt. (lb.) sf Sale Price C$/lb.> u Sale Price ($/hd) 2.111 Cows Cows •' 2.121 Kef. Calves Hef. Calves 2.131 Str. Calves TO , ft Str. Calves to • v^r 2.1m Brd. Rep. Hef. Brd. Rep. Hef. 2.151 Yr. Hef, 3D -77S .36 Yr. Hef. 30 •77S- 37 2.161 Yr. Strs. (oO Yr. Strs. 60 . y o 2.171 Bulls tzao .zS Bulls /Z.OO • as 2.181 Yr. Fdrs. Yr. Fdrs. 2.191 2 Yr. Fdrs. 2 Yr. Fdrs. 2.201 Culls 30 (OOO zz Culls SO /OOO zz Table 3: Note 1: Note 2: .Livestock Purchases f o r Y ^ r 1. Year ?, a„„ v-,- , Table 3 need be completed f u l l y only i f Option 1 i s chosen. For a l l other options information on average weight (lb.) and purchase price ($/lb.) or $/head) only i s required. I f various purchase options are to be considered the number of head to be bought may be decided o r t h i s number may b-e determined by the model. The time period of purchase should be i n d i c a t e d , i . e . , s p r i n g , summer or I f Option 1 i s followed the l i v e s t o c k budget generator as shown f o r Table 2 should be completed. Ln o TABLE 3 ';• LIVESTOCK PURCHASES: YEAR 1 Animal Total No.Hd. Purch. j i Avg. Mr Purch. Price ($/U0 i I Purch. Price ($/hd) M Number of Head Purchased Per Month „. Class • WC • (lb.) 2 I Jan. 51 Feb. Mar. n Apr. u May 2 1 June . 3 ] July <.! Aug.. si Sept. •, ,' Oct. Nov. \\ Dec. Cows 3.012 3.013 Hef. Calves 3.022 3.023 Str. Calves 3.032 3.033 Brd.Rep.Hef. 3.042 3.043 Yr. Hef. 3.052 3.053 Yr. Strs. 3.062 3.063 Bulls f360 3.072 3.073 Yr. Fdrs. 3.082 3.083 2 Yr. Fdrs. 3.092 3.093 Livestock Purchases, Year 2 Livestock Purchases, Year 3 Animal Class Total No.Hd. Purch. i i Avg. Wt. (lb.) 21 Purch. Price ($/lb) 91 Purch. Price ($/hd) * I Animal Class Total No.Hd. Purch. 5 1 Avg. Wt. (lb.) ei Purch. Price ($/lb.) 71 Purch. Price ($/hd) i i 3.101 3.111 3.121 3.131 3.141 3.151 3.161 3.171 3.181 Cows Ccws 3.102 Hef. Calves Hef. Calves 3.112 Str. Calves Str. Calves • 3.122 \ Brd.Rep.Hef. Brd.Rep.Hef. 3.132 Yr. Hef. Yr. Hef. 3.142 Yr. Strs. Yr. Strs 3.152 Bulls fSOO Bulls 3.162 ' Yr. Fdrs. Yr. Fdrs. 3.172 2 Yr. Fdrs. 2 Yr. Fdrs. 3.182 Table 4: Production of Crops and Feeds: Year 1 Note 1: Th i s t a b l e should be completed f o r a l l options, the crop/season being considered r e f e r s t o the p l a n t i n g s of the f i r s t year. Note 2: I f d i f f e r e n t methods of fodder/hay production are to be evaluated i t w i l l be necessary t o complete the s e c t i o n s of the input forms d e a l i n g with crops more than once. That i s , i f two a l t e r n a t i v e s are being evaluated complete twice and the two sets of r e s u l t s may be compared. I f three cropping a l t e r n a t i v e s are being evaluated complete three times and evaluate the r e s u l t s . Note 3; Feed on hand a t the s t a r t of winter feeding ( t h i s i s the same time p e r i o d as t h a t o f the l i v e s t o c k count, •t October) should i n c l u d e hay/feed produced and on hand, hay/feed already bought and on hand or being d e l i v e r e d , and hay/feed stocks t h a t you a n t i c i p a t e buying before, the end o f December. Note H; In d e f i n i n g how much s p r i n g , summer and f a l l range you have i t w i l l be necessary t o break the year down i n t o the four seasons experienced i n your area. . For example: u Oct. Nov. Dec. Winter-Jan. Feb. Mar. Spring-Apr. May June . Summer-J u l y . A M . J * — F a l l - - — Sect. Oct. Nov. to TABLE 4 PRODUCTION OF CROPS AND FEEDS» YEAR 1 First Year's Harvest Feed cn Hand Last Year as of Start of Winter Feeding Plus Anticipated Purchases Before Dec. 3 1 Own Land Leased Land Crop and Feed Description Acres Total Yield/Ac. Units Acres Total Yield/Ac. u 21 31 *ii Tons 51 lS/Ton> 11 4 . 0 1 1 Grass Hay Tons 4 . 0 2 1 Alfalfa Hay Tons 4 . 0 3 1 Mixed Hay Z.oS Tons 3 7SS 70 4 . 0 4 1 Cereal Hay Tons 4 . 0 5 1 Mixed Silage Tons 4 . 0 6 1 Com Silage Tons 4 . 0 7 1 Cereal Silage • Tons • 4 . 0 8 1 Oats Bu. • 4 . 0 9 1 Barley Bu. 27 4 . 1 0 1 Feed Wheat Bu. 4 . 1 1 1 Other 1 . 4 . 1 2 1 Other 2 . 4 . 1 3 1 4 . 1 4 1 Protein Supp. Other 3 . Covernment Range Leased Range forJfear 1 Paid in theJfcnth_o pth) A.U.M. 21 $/A.U.M. 31 Jan. <>i Feb. s i Mar. t i Apr. May i i June 21 July 31 Aug. Sept. s» Oct s i Nov. n J Dec. u 4 . 1 5 ? 4 . 1 5 3 4 . 1 6 2 4 . 1 6 3 W O O 6 2 4 . 1 7 2 4 . 1 7 3 4 . 1 8 2 4 . 1 8 3 4 . 1 5 1 4 . 1 6 1 4 . 1 7 1 4 . 1 8 1 Winter R Spring R Summer R Fall R ±Al—Production of Crops and Feeds During Year 2 Note 1: Note 2: Note 3: Note 4j Th i s t a b l e should be completed f o r a l l options. As s t a t e d on the previous page, i t i s p o s s i b l e t o e v a l u a t e a number o f a l t e r n a t i v e s f e e d i n g systems over the three year p e r i o d . The e f f e c t o f v a r y i n g crop y i e l d s (good, average o r bad weather) on the production p a t t e r n s and p r o f i t a b i l i t y of the ranch may be evaluated by a l l o w i n g crop y i e l d s t o vary w i t h the type of weather expected. There are numerous combinations t h a t may be looked a t . For example: Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Example 1 Example 2 Example 3 Example H Example 5 3 Good Years 3 Average Years 3 Poor Years 3 Mixed Years good y i e l d s good y i e l d s good y i e l d s average y i e l d s average y i e l d s average y i e l d s poor y i e l d s poor y i e l d s poor y i e l d s good y i e l d s poor y i e l d s average y i e l d s average y i e l d s good y i e l d s average y i e l d s Ln TABLE 5 PRODUCTION OF CROP AND FEEDS DURING YEAR 2 Crop and Feed Description , Own Land Leased Land 1 1 Acres n Total Yield/Acre Units n Acres " Total Yield/Acre 5.011 5.021 5.031 5.041 5.051 5.061 5.071 5.081 5.091 5.101 5.111 5.121 Grass Hay Tons Al f a l f a Hay Tons Mixed Hay 2 OS 3 Tons Cereal Hay Tons Mixed Silage Tons Com Silage Tons • Cereal Silage Tons Oats Bu. Barley Bu. Feed Wheat Bu. Other 1 • Other 2 RANGE YEAR 2 Government Range n ai A.U.M. 91 $/A.U.M. 5.131 Winter R. 5.141 Spring R. 5.151 Sumner R. r &>Z 5.161 F a l l R. Ul CD TABLE 6 PRODUCTION OF CROP AND FEEDS DURING YEAR 3 Crop and Feed Description Own Land Leased Land Acres Total Yield/Acre 21 Units Acres ii Total Yield/Acre HI 6.011 6.021 6.031 6.041 6.051 6.061 6.071 6.081 6.091 6.101 6.111 6.121 Grass Hay Tens Alfalfa Hay Tons • Mixed Hay X OS 3. Tons Cereal Hay • Tons Mixed Silage Tons Corn Silage Tons Cereal Silage Tons Oats Bu. Barley Bu. Feed Wheat Bu. Other 1 Other 2 RANGE YEAR 3 ii Government Range ,, A.U.M. ,, $/A.U.M. 6.131 6.141 6.151 6.161 Winter R. Soring R. Summer R. . 6 Z Fall R. Table 7: Composition of Winter Feed Rations (lb./animal/day) Note 1: winter and some may be fed in S e JiriSK othS tE^JnSS M a r « f « d v d i f f e r e n t rations over the al l an^al classes (that are on hanS as^l ^ t ^ o T S S * Note 2; Note 3; Note <*: 00 I f some ingredient (feed) i s included i n one of the r a t i o n s p e c i f i c a t i o n s ensure that the ingredient (feed) i s produced or bought. I f t h i s i s not done that feed w i l l be bought at an extremely high p r i c e . \ In conjunction with the cropping pattern a l t e r n a t i v e winter feeding schedules may be evaluated by Completing the schedules more than once and evaluating the r e s u l t s . i f Option 5 i s being considered (research option) i t i s possible to expand t h i s r a t i o n s e l e c t i o n and d i f f e r e n t f i x e d r a t i o n formulaes s p e c i f i e d and the best selected. TABLE 7 COMPOSITION OF WINTER FEED RATIONS (LB./DAY) 7.011 7.021 7.031 7.041 7.051 7.061 7.071 7.081 7.091 7.101 7.111 7.121 7.131 7.141 Description of Feed in Ration , Ration 1 u Ration 2 ii Ration 3 i i Ration 4 * > Ration 5 51 _ Ration 6 Ration 7 71 Grass Hav i Alfalfa Hay Mixed Hay IZ. zS Cereal Hay Mixed Silaw Corn Silage Cereal Silage Oats Barley 3 z Feed Wheat ' Other 1. Other 2. Protein Suop. Other 3. Note 2: Note 3: Note <*: Note 5: w » ~ > . * w . . 0 * u i - u x n e r e n i periods o f time. To c l a r i f y the t e ™ i „ „ l o 8 y used regarding the winter p e r i o d s the f o l l o w i n g diagram i s presented, F i n a n c i a l Year Jan. r Jan. 1st Year Jan. 2nd year Dec./Jan. 3rd Year Feeding Year 1st Winter 2nd Winter 3rd Winter ••th Winter TABLE 8 F E E D I N G S C H E D U L E Table 9: 3 Year Winter Feeding Schedule Note 1; T h i s t a b l e should be completed f o r a l l options. Note 2; Good, average, bad w i n t e r feeding seasons (or a combination t h e r e o f ) may be accounted f o r by v a r y i n g the number o f winter days over which the animals are fed. For example: Example 1 Example 2 Example 3 Average Years 2 Good; 2 Bad 2 Average; 2 Bad Last Winter (no. o f days fed) 180 165 180 F i r s t Winter (no. of days fed) 180 165 180 Second Winter (no. of days fed) 180 200 205 T h i r d Winter (no. of days fed) 180 200 205 I Note 3: Winter feeding c o n d i t i o n s may be c o r r e l a t e d with the type o f crop season you have had. I f t h i s i s the case you should r e f e r back t o the crop seasons you considered i n Tables 4, 5, and 6. Note **: You may wish t o make s e v e r a l t e s t s thereby e v a l u a t i n g the e f f e c t o f d i f f e r e n t w i n t e r seasons on p r o f i -t a b i l i t y . The need to purchase feeds o r ho l d stocks may be evaluated g i v e n these d i f f e r e n t c o n d i t i o n s . X TABLE 9 WINTER FEEDING SCHEDULE Winter Winter Animal Class Ration Number n Total Number of Days on 11 Ration Ration Number 3 1 Total Number of Days on „, Ration 9.Oil 9.021 9.031 9.041 9.051 9.061 9.071 Cows Cows / Oows Het. Calves lief. Calves ~ Hef. Calves Str. Calves z •p /eo 9.081 9.091 9.101 9.111 9.121 9.131 9.141 Str. Calves tltr. Calves BrxJ. Hef. Brd. Hef. c~ / ..... / & o /8-Q Unci. Het. Yr. Hef. Yr. Hef. 9.151 9.161 *r. Het. Yr. StrsJ 9.171 ; 9.181 9.191 9.201 Yr. Strs. i r. Strs. Bulls Bulls /<s o 9.211 9.221 9.231 Bull;; Yr. Fdrs. Yr. Fdrs. 9.241 9.251 9.261 9.271 Yr. Fdrs. '/ Yr. Fdrs. 2 Yr. Fdrs. 2 Yr. Fdrs. Table 10: Variable Livestock Expenses ( F i r s t and Subsequent Years)  Note 1: This table should be completed f o r a l l options. Note 2: Your records should provide information regarding these cash expenses. The month of payment r e f l e c t s cash outflows from the ranch i n that p a r t i c u l a r month. Note 3: You may consider working these costs out on an animal u n i t basis and then obtain the t o t a l through m u l t i p l i c a t i o n . Note t : The costs as estimated i n Table 10 fop the f i r s t year w i l l be used as an approximate cost f o r years two and three. TABIE 10 LIVESTOCK EXPENSES Description of Total $ Livestock Expenses Allocated to Monthly Cash. Outlay s ($/mo.) Purchases Per Year Jan. ? i Feb. J I Mar. * i Apr. 51 May si June 71 . July ; I v Aug. 2.1 Sept. i i Oct. n KOV. 51 Dec. si Salt ZOO /OO 10.012 Minerals /ZOO 10.022 700 Bedding ^5 10.032 Vet. £ Medicine /FOO £TOO 10.042 Breeding 10,052 Insurance 10.062 Frht. £ Hauling TOO 10.072 /OO 7S~ Sales. Commissions / 3YS X z. • 10.082 Hired Labour ^-06 10.092 Other Exp. 1 / OO 10.102 . /-PS-Other Exp. 2 > 10.112 Table 11; Crop Sales - Years 1, 2, and 3 Note 1: This table should be completed only i f Options 1 and 4 .are followed. However, i f Options 2 and 3 are followed the sale price ($/ton) that you could expect to receive f o r your crop should be entered, i . e . , col..21 and c o l . 41 f o r Year 3. Note 2: The t o t a l cash received (price x quantity) i n each month should be indicated. I TABLE 11 CROP SALES: YEAR 1 1 Amt. Sale Cash Received in the Month o f ($/no.) Type o f Crop Sold Sold n(Tons) Price 2^ $/Ton) i i Jan. m Feb. Mar. 61 Apr. 71 May I l June 21 July i i Aug. Sil Sept; S i Oct. Cl Nov. 71 Dec. Grass Hay 11.012 Alfalfa Hay 11.022 Mixed Hay 11.032 1 Cereal Hay 11.042 Mixed Silage 11.052 Corn Silage i 11.062 Cereal Silage I 11.072 Oats 11.082 Barley 11.092 I Feed Wheat 11.102 Other 1. 11.112 1 Other 2. 11.122 Year 2 Year 3 Type of Crop Sold Amount Sold i i (Tons) Sale Price 2, ($/Ton) Amount Sold 3, (Tans) Sale Price t,, ($/Tcn) 11.131 11.141 11.151 11.161 11.171 11.181 11.191 11.201 11.211 U.221 11.231 11.241 Grass Hay Alfalfa Hay Mixed Hay Cereal Hay Mixed Silaffi Corn Silap.e Cereal Silage Oats Barley Feed Wheat Other 1. Other 2. Table 12; Purchase of Feed Supplies During Year 1 Note 1: If Option 1 i s following this table should be completed. If Options 2 and 3 are followed, only the purchase price per ton of feed need be entered both i n the Purchase Price column and the months you expect to buy feed. If Option 4 i s followed (this option allows you to adjust livestock numbers to given feed supplies) you may exclude a l l feed purchases i f you so wish or you may complete Table 12 allowing f o r the purchase of certain feeds i n fixed amounts. (Ti 00 I TABLE 12 PURCHASE OF FEED SUPPLIES -MUMS YEAR 1 Type of Feed Purchased Amount Purchased (Tonr) n Purchase Price ($/Ton) 21 Payment Occurs in the ffcnth ofi ($/mo.) <Jan. 31 Feb. wi Mar. s i Apr. 61 May 71 . June n July 21 Aug. . 91 Sept. Oct. i i NOV. ( l Dec. 12.011 Grass Hay 12.012 12.021 Alfalfa Hay 12.022 12.031 Mixed Hay 3 0 zzso 12.032 12.041 Cereal Hay 12.042 12.051 Mixed Silage 12.052 12.061 Com Silage 12.062 12.071 . Cereal Silage 12.072 12.081 Oats 12.082 12.091 Barley GO 3 ooo ZOOO JTOO 12.092 GOO 12.101 Feed Wheat 12.102 12.111 Other 1. 12.112 12.121 Other 2. t 12,122 12.131 Protein Suppl. 12.132 12.141 Other 3. 12.142 Table 13: Purchase of Feed Supplies for Year 2 and 3 Note 1: It is generally f a i r l y d i f f i c u l t to predict feed purchases i n Years 2 and 3. The amount purchased w i l l depend on a number of variables. I f Option 1 i s followed and you know the quantities to be purchased you may enter these amounts. If these quantities are not known enter the purchase price per ton of the feeds that you are prepared to buy and have included i n your ration specifications in Table 7. In other words, enter the PURCHASE PRICE PER TON  ONLY. Likewise, for a l l other options enter the purchase price per ton only (exclude the amount except in Option U where you may wish to predetermine this amount. o TABLE 13 PURCHASE OF FEED SUPPLIES Year 2 Year 3 Type of Feed Purchased 1 Amt. Purchased (Tons) 2 Purchase Price ($/Ton) 3 Amt. Purchased (Tons) Purchase Price ($/Ton) 13.011 Grass Hay 13.021 Alfalfa Hay 13.031 Mixed Hay 13.041 Cereal Hay 13.051 Mixed Silage 13.061 Com Silage 13.071 Cereal Silage -13.081 Oats 13.091 Barley / 2 J T 13.101 Feed Wheat 13.111 Other 1. 13.121 Other 2. 13.131 Protein Supp. 13.141 Other 3. Table I t . Crop Expenses During Year 1 Note 1: Complete this table for a l l options. The t o t a l of a l l variable crop expenses should be obtainable from your records and i f these are not available the costs/acre may be c a l -culated and Table IU completed accordingly. If crops other than these normally grown are being considered, the variable costs per acre should be budgeted and Table 14 com-pleted. Note 2; CFor Research Personnel only). Table 14 i s designed to expedite the completion of i t . Crop costs on an acreage basis for an individual farm are not always easily available.. However, to t a l costs can often be obtained, the month of payment can be approximated 1 and then this t o t a l cost for each item i s allocated to each crop on a percentage basis. , If this proves to be unsuitable, the input form w i l l be redesigned. ^ TABLE 14 PROP EXPENSES DURING YEAR. 1 Nature of Expenditure Seed tore. Sprays Equip. Exp. Custom Wk. Hired Lab. Other Exp. 2. ^ ^nc-r f?,',tit.\ Total $ Per Year i ! X OOO 7oC> Jan. u .Feb. U Crp^jxpenscs on, an Annual Mar. m z. so Apr. si •7 0 0 May 81 is-oo •J.OOO •S -QCJ Jui'iC 7 1 14.012 14,022 14.032 14.042 14.052 14.062 14.072 14.082 14.092 July C O D S C O 1L Sept. jrc>o 05t7 Nov. Dec. ±1 i H U I Barley Feed Wheat Other 1. IX. Other 2. AX. Table 15; A l l o c a t i o n o f V a r i a b l e Crop Costs t o Crops f o r Years 2 and 3  Note 1; Complete t h i s t a b l e f o r a l l o p t i o n s . Note 2; Table I t w i l l provide a base f o r completion o f Table 15. I f no changes i n crop acreages and c o s t s are to be expected f o r years 2 and 3 the same t o t a l c o s t s may be used. I f a change i n the crop plans f o r years 2 and 3 i s a n t i c i p a t e d the c o s t s should be budgeted out and entered i n Table 15. I t may be e a s i e r t o s t a r t from a c o s t / a c r e b a s i s . TABLE IS AIlJXATION Q F CROP COSTS TO CROPS FOR YEARS 2 AND 3 Nature of Expenditure Total $ Per Year I i Allocation of Crop Costs to Crops (Decimal Fraction) Grass 2iHay • Alfalfa 31 Hay Mixed i. iHay Cereal si Hay Mixed s gilage Com 7Silage • Cereal-i Silage Oats ai Barley n Feed x, i Wheat • •Other 1 si Other 2 si Seed X 15.012 Fert.. 1 .15.022 Sprays 15.032 Equip. Exp. -V ooo X 15.042 Custcm Wrk. 2 W O X 15.052 Hired Lab. 3 toOCi X 15.062 Other Exp. 1 1 15.072 Other Exp. 2 1 15.082 Other Exp. 3 15.092 Nature of Expenditure Total $ Per Year l I Allocation of Crop Costs to Crops (Decimal Fraction) Grass Hay 21 Alfal. Hay 91 Mixed Hay HI Cereal Hay 51 Mixed Silage s i Com Silage 71 Cereal .Silage i i Oats 21 Barley Feed Wheat f 1 Other 1 51 Other 2 s i Seed /S&O 1 15.102 Fert. 2 t£>00 . i 15.112 Sprays 15.122 Equip. Exp. tfOOO 1 15.132 Custom Wrk. 3. 30C> 1 15.142 Hired Lab. 3 CcOO l 15.152 • Other Exp. 1 r OOO i 15.162 Other Exp. 2 J! SO 1 15.172 Other Exp. 3 15.182 Table 16: Land Rental for. Crop and r * P d Production Note 1: Note 2: This t a b l e should be completed f o r a l l options i f land i s a c t u a l l y r e n t e d o r i f the p r o f i t a b i l i t y o f r e n t i n g land i s being considered. I f the l a t t e r i s the case, two runs should be made, i . e . , the s i t u a t i o n where no l a n d i s r e n t e d versus the s i t u a t i o n where l a n d i s r e n t e d . In other words, the o p t i o n o f r e n t i n g some hay l a n d i s open t o you and you may wish t o evaluate t h i s o p t i o n — i s i t p r o f i t a b l e o r not? In Option 5 (the research option) the l e v e l f o r these v a r i a b l e s optimized. However, the month of payment should be s t i p u l a t e d f o r the f i r s t y ear. TABLE 16 LAND RENTAL FOR CROP AND FEED rTODUCTIQN Crop Grown on Rented Land Total Cost Year 1 (.$) i l Rental Cost Allocated to the Month of: ( $ / i r o . ) Total $ Total $ Jan. Feb. . % \. Mar. t< i Apr. 5 1 May K l June ii July n Aug. 21 . Sept. 31 Oct. S I , Nov. M ,„ Dec. 6 1 Year 2 »i Year 3 1 1 Grass Hay 16.012 16.013 Alfalfa Hay 16.022 16.023 Mixed Hay HOO 16.032 16.033 Cereal Hav 16.042 16.043 y  Mixed Silage 16.052 16.053 Corn Silage 16.062 16.063 Cereal Silapp 16.072 16.073 Oats 16.082 16.083 Barley 16.092 16.093 Feed Wheat 16.102 16.103 Other 1. 16.112 • 16.113 Other 2. 16.122 16.123 e 1 7 6 1 8 : Balance Sheet as a t 1st January (1st Year) Note 2: Note It The balance sheet should be completed f o r a l l o p t i o n s . These balances w i l l serve as the s t a r t i n g balances f o r the model. Your records should p r o v i d e t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n . The t o t a l crop inventory values and l i v e s t o c k i n v e n t o r y v a l u e s are determined as o f January 1st o r December 31st. The inventory numbers f o r crops and l i v e s t o c k were a l s o e s t a b l i s h e d i n Table 1 and Table 4 f o r the beginning o f the w i n t e r season. These opening winter stocks as adjusted should balance with the values i n Table 17. I f they do not, d i s c r e p a n c i e s i n the owner's equity balance w i l l r e s u l t . The l a s t s e c t i o n o f Table 17 allows f o r d i f f e r e n c e s between balance sheet values and market values f o r l a n d , b u i l d i n g s , machinery and o t h e r i n t a n g i b l e s . Note 3; oo TABLE 17 6 18 LAST YEAR'S STATEMENT OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES AND OWNER'S EQUITY (AS OF DEC. 31. LAST YEAR) ASSETS LIABILrriES aTJOTT ASSETS: i i si J I FARM BANK so (Poo j CURRENT RECEIVABLES ZZZZZ I INVENTORIES: TOTAL CROP INV. 3bSVO | TOTAL LIVESTOCK INV. /zgsxa ] TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 2./Soya FIXED ASSETS (AT COST): LAND AND IMPROVEMENTS /&z ooo BUILDINGS £ STRUCTURES , .s<?ooo MACHINES £ EQUIP. 32. 000 LESS: ACCUM. DEPREC' ,{3 gap -j TOTAL UNDEPRECIATED COSTS 2 s 7 ono OTHER ASSETS: INTANGIBLES (QUOTAS, ETC.) INVESTMENTS iQoa TOTAL OTHER ASSETS , / 000 TOTAL ASSETS: y ^ Q 7 g EST. MARKET VALUES: " v ' ' LAND 6 IMPROVEMENTS ^Oooo BLDGS. £ STRUCTURES OcQ MACHINERY £ EQUIP. .7 / 000 INTANGIBLES (QUOTAS, ETC.) 18.011 18.021 18.031 18.041 18.051 18.061 18.071 18.081 18.091 18.101 18.111 18.121 18.131 18.141 18.151 CURRENT LIABILITIES: CURRENT PAYABLES TOTAL CURRENT' LIAB. TERM LIABILITIES: FARM IMPROVE. LOANS BANK LOANS CREDIT UNIONS DEALER £ SUPPLY CO. FINANCE CO'S. FARM CREDIT CORP. FED. GOV'T. (NON FCC) PROV. GOV'T. PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS TOTAL TERM LIABILITIES TOTAL LIABILITIES 11 22. S-QQ OWNER'S EQUITY OWNER'S EQUITY DEC. 31 TOTAL LIABILITIES 6 OWNER'S EQUITY 21 t/</3 67>Q Table 19: Monthly A l l o c a t i o n o f Cash Inflows (Year I) N o t e _ l : Table 19 allows f o r cash income from o t h e r sources i n c l u d i n g cash borrowed and non farm income. T h i s t a b l e should be completed f o r a l l o p t i o n s . Note 2: Over and above loans t h a t are a c t u a l l y made, loans w i l l be secured i f necessary a t the ra t e r e f l e c t e d i n Table 23 up t o some maximum l e v e l . oo o m TABLE 19 MONTHLY ALLOCATION OF CASH INFLOWS (YEAR 1) TOTAL First Year ($) u Jan. 21 Feb. 31 Mar.. Apr. May 61 June .71 July i i Aug. 21 Sept. Oct. m Nov. 51 • Dec. (i Other Farm Ino [19.011 [19.021 Capital Sales: (19.031 19. o m yme: Custom Work Other Mach. 6 EquiD. /ooo fOOO • Other Term Owner Loans: 19.051 19.061 19 .071 19 .081 19.091 19.101 19.111 19.121 19.131 , ls Ccntri 19.141 19.151 19.161 19.171 19.181 19 .191 19.201 19 .211 Farm ImDrovement Loans Banks Credit Unions Dealer £ Supply Co. *i> ooo H'COO Finance Companies Farm Credit Corp. Fed. Gov't, (non FCC) Provincial Gov't. Private Individuals sutions: Non-Farm Income avail, for farm use Rents 1 Investment Income /z o Money from Personal Savings Account Other 1) 2) 3) 4) This t a b l e should be completed f o r a l l o p t i o n s . I t allows f o r overhead expenses, c a p i t a l investments, p r i n c i p a l repayment and withdrawal o f cash from the business i n xear 1. Farm c a p i t a l investments and p r i n c i p a l repayments i n Years 2 and 3 are assumed t o be zero. TABLE 2Q MONTHLY ALLOCATION OF CASH OUTFLOWS (YEAR 1) F i r s t Year ($) i J a n . 11 121 ,Mar . 5 1 A P r . 6 Hay 7 J u n e J u l y 11 1 Sept, 31 r Oct . s i N o v . Dec. 11 . O i l . 0 2 1 . 0 3 1 .om .051 . 0 6 1 . 0 7 1 . 0 8 1 . 0 9 1 . 1 0 1 . 1 1 1 Farr . 1 2 1 . 1 3 1 .141 . 1 5 1 P r i r . 1 6 1 . 1 7 1 .181 . 1 9 1 .201 . 2 1 1 . 2 2 1 . 2 3 1 . 2 4 1 . 2 5 1 Owne . 2 6 1 . 2 7 1 .281 . 2 9 1 . 3 0 1 . 3 1 1 . 3 2 1 . 3 3 1 Mach. Repai rs tsoo j .300 300 > \ 1 L i v e s t o c k Equip . Expenses 7S I .5-0 2.5" A u t o , T r u c k s , L icense tees ZOO 1 -2 OO i i u i i d i n g Koixairs 2.S-0 -2_T 0 Fences 3 OO •too V e h i c l e £ Equ ip , f u e l , o i l •zs- OO -5-0 O JS-O O -JTOO s~<oo Propane 6 h e a t i n g o i l Insu iw ice too -7oa Rent Hydro and Telephone 1 70 7CJ 7 O 70 70 7 0 7C> 70 7 o ?o 7a -7 0 Property Taxes 1 ,is~oo \ us 00 I C a p i t a l Investment: -j Land £ Improvements B u i l d i n g s £ S t r u c t u r e s Machines £ Equip 3 OOO J.OOQ Debt. I n t e r e s t i c i t a l Pavrcvaits: Farm Improvement Loans x ooo jroo .500 .SOO s~oo Banks B s~ooO SOOO C r e d i t Unions 9 Dealer £ Supply Co. 1 Finance Companies 1! Farm C r e d i t Corp. CpOOO -Saoa 3000 Federa l G o v ' t , (non F .C .C . ) l Y o v i n c i a l G o v ' t . P r i v a t e I n d i v i d u a l s ; r ' s Withdrawals : Investment ( s a v i n g s , s t o c k s , £ bonds) Y • ; • Persona l L i v i n g Expenses 3cO OO Farm Produce Used f z oo /act. /OO too too too tea too too too t" OO Persona l Auto Expense .300 s~o tOO -fro Home Maintenance Exp. /OO 7-f Other 1) 2) 3) Table 21: Changes i n Fixed Farm Assets l t b l e ^ ° U l d b ? c o m P l e * e d f o r a 1 1 options. I t allows f or the cash flows associated e n S J J ' f n l l T ' I n ™ a n y instances where a rancher does not anticipate significant changes in these capital items the table may be ignored. IGNORE IF MAJOR CHANGES NOT oo V TABLE 21 CHANGES IN FIXED FARM ASSETS Land & Improvements Buildings & Structures Machines & Equipment 22i Summary of Market Values o f A e s a t i year p e r i o d i t should be completed a p p r e c i a t i o n « a n t i c i p a t e d over the three Table 23: Miscellaneous Information N2te_l: Table 23 i s important and should be completed f o r a l l o p t i o n s . - 187 -TABLE 22 SUMMARY OF MARKET VALUES OF ASSETS TYPE OF ASSET YEAR 1 YEAR 2 21 YEAR 3 . 31 22. O U LAND E IMPROVEMENTS 2 SS'ooo OOO 'l&OOOO 22.021 BUILDINGS E STRUCTURES 3S~o O O 3 ^ 0 0 0 22.031 MACHINERY £ EQUIPMENT 3/00 0 3-ysroO 36 OOO 22. om OTHER ASSETS /zoo 22.051 INTANGIBLES (QUOTA, PATENTS, ETC.) TABLE 23 23.011 23.021 23.031 23.041 23.051 MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION CALF CROP: COWS = NO. CALVES WEANED/NO. COWS EXPOSED TO BULLS CALF CROP: BRED HEIFERS = NO. CALVES WEANED/NO. HEIFERS EXPOSED TO BULLS REPLACEMENT RATE: COWS = NO. COWS CULLED FROM HERD/NO. COWS IN HERD BEFORE CULLING REPLACEMENT RATE: BRED HEIFERS = NO. BRED HEIFERS CULLED FROM HERD/NO. BRED HEF. BEFORE CULL BREEDING PROGRAM FOR HEIFERS = NO. HEIFERS BRED AS YEARLING/110. HEF. IN HERD 11 2. . 1 a * * * * * 23.061 INTEREST RATE FOR OPERATING CAPITAL 23.071 MAX. AMOUNT OF OPERATING CAPITAL THAT CAN BE OBTAINED AT INTEREST RATE SPECIFIED 23.081 INTEREST RATE FOR EMERGENCY LOAN ft ft ft ft * 23.091 HOW MANY DAYS WERE LIVESTOCK CN WINTER FEED PRIOR TO DEC. 31 LAST YEAR 23.101 TO YOUR BEST ESTIMATE HOW MANY DAYS DO YOU ANTICIPATE ANIMALS WILL HAVE BEEN ON WINTER FEED PRIOR TO DEC. 31, YEAR 1? 23.111 YEAR 2? 23.121 YEAR 3? So ooo /Z. 6 / 6 / ft ft ft ft ft - 188 -TABLE 24 MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION 21.011 IN YEAR 1 LIVESTOCK WILL BE ON LEASED WINTER RANGE FOR 24.021 24.031 24.051 24.061 24.081 24.091 STARTING IN THE ENDING IN THE 24.041 IN YEAR 1 LIVESTOCK WILL BE ON LEASED SPRING RANGE FOR STARTING IN THE ENDING IN THE 24.071 IN YEAR 1 LIVESTOCK WILL BE ON LEASED SUMMER RANGE FOR STARTING IN THE ENDING IN THE 24.101 IN YEAR 1 LIVESTOCK WILL BE ON LEASED FALL RANGE FOR 24.111 STARTING IN THE 24.121 ENDING IN THE 24.191 AMOUNT OF DEPRECIATION TO BE ENTERED FOR YEAR 1 24.201 AMOUNT OF DEPRECIATION TO BE ENTERED FOR YEAR 2 24. 211 AMOUNT OF DEPRECIATION TO BE ENTERED FOR YEAR 3 11 J MONTHS ] MO. OF THE YEAR 1 MO. OF THE YEAR 3 j MONTHS ] MO. OF THE YEAR MO. OF THE YEAR MONTHS MO. OF THE YEAR MO. OF THE YEAR 3 MONTHS 1 MO. OF THE YEAR | 1 MO. OF THE YEAR JO Animal Class 1 love Hef. Calves Steer Calves Bred j Yr. Yearling Heifer Yr. Steer Bulls Feeder 2 Yr. Feeder Culls 1 Opening Stock Winter '3oo (oO Winter! Purchases t Sales Closing Stocki Winter Opening Stock! Spring 3aa CO Spring! Purchases l Sales Closing Stocki Spring Opening Stock! Sunaer Cows 300 GO flcf. Colve* 270| H Steer Cal veal I >3S\ Brad Yr. Heifer Yr. Steer Bulla Yr. Feeder 2 Yr. FeedeH Culls . CO so. 3 • 0 • • • 30 3 • E ••• • CO GO 3 0 30 IS iS 3 0 lb a • Opening Stock Summer Sumner Purchases Susaer Sales t Deaths Clcslng Stock Suiuer Opening Stock Fall rail J Fail Purchases Salet 1 Closing Stock : Opening Stock Winter hod Sack /sci V 3 30\ 3d SO <bO\ V-5" • • — so E • • • ?6> 87 _ • _ • _• * Add eroesulsa to get tha opening stock at aiauer after these adjuttmmte bava taken place. A P P E N D I X T A B L E 1 ( C o n t ' d . ) > L I V E S T O C K B U D G E T G E N E R A T O R FOR Y E A R £ O p e n i n g S t o c k s t B e g i n n i n g o f W i n t e r a t . the end o f t h e c a l v i n g s e a s o n ( s p r i n g ) a n i u w i l s a ail a r e &ovec n t o d i f - u f e r e n t n c l a s s e s c c < Covs H e f . C a l v e s S t e e r C a l v e s B r e d Y r . H e i f e r Y r . S t e e r B u l l s Y r . F e e d e r 2 Y r . F e e d e r C u l l a Cows |Hef. S t e e r C a l v e s C a l v e s 3oo '.70 1*5 30 A n i m a l C l a s s c-o B r e d Y e a r l i n g 60 66 30 i-5 Y r . | Y r . H e i f e r [ S t e e r s B u l l s [Yr . F e e d e r 30 SO 2 Y r . F e e d e r C u l l s A d j u s t e d Numbers A f t e r C a l v i n g P u r c h a s e s D u r i n g Y e a r S a l e s D u r i n g Y e a r . D e a t h C l o s i n g S t o c k 3oo, ISO 150 SiO to IjO -22. 3o  CO V • _ _ 3 0 3oo| CO 3o a • • • • O * Add c r o s s w i s e t o g e t t h e s e t o t a l s APPEHDIX TABLE I (Cont'd.)I LIVESTOCK BUDGET GENERATOR FOR YEAR 3 Opening Stock at Beginning of Winter at the end of the calving season (spring) oolrjla are moved) to dif-ferent classes B r e d w l Y e a r l i n g Couo K e f . C a l v e s Steer Calves Yr. Heifer Yr. Steer Bulls Yr. Feeder 2 Yr. Feeder Culls Animal Class jCows [Hef. JCa.lveS Steer p i Ives 3CO /3f iii 30 Bred Yoarltna lYr. W> g [Heifer iSteers Bulls CO 50 IS SO 3o TYr. F e e d e r 2 Yr. F e e d e r Culls • • Adjusted Purchases Sales Ceath Closing Numbers During During Stock After Year Year Calving I S O ISO] c-o 10 So 2JL. 30 3 0 fed 6>0 • OO 3a 0 • • h-1 * Add crosovla* to gat these t o u l l - 192 -APPENDIX I I BEEF MODEL MATRIX DATA - 193 -IDENTIFICATION OF COLUMN CODES AND ACTIVITIES General Format: 8 d i g i t s O O O O O O O O / \ \ \ V Year Quarter C l a s s A c t i v i t y Sub Cla s s EXAMPLE : 1 0 9 1 0 0 0 5 / \ \ X. v F i r s t Quarter Crops Opening Grass Year Undefined Stock Hay F i r s t D i g i t : Year: 1 l a s t w i n t e r 2 Spring Year 3 Summer Year 4 F a l l Year Second D i g i t : Quarter: 1 Winter 2 Spring 3 Summer 4 F a l l T h i r d D i g i t : C l a s s : 9 Feed 8 Leased Range and Cropland 7 L i v e s t o c k 6 Cash Balance 5 Cash Loan 4 Term Loan 3 Other Cash Receipts 2 Other Cash Expenses - 194 -Fourth D i g i t : A c t i v i t y : 1 Opening Stock 2 Purchases 3 S a l e s 4 C l o s i n g Stock 5 T r a n s f e r A c t i v i t i e s 6 . Cash R e c i p t s 7 Cash Expenses Seventh and E i g h t h D i g i t : Subclasses f o r Feed: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Winter Range Spri n g Range Summer Range F a l l Range Grass Hay A l f a l f a Hay Mixed Hay C e r e a l Hal Mixed S i l a g e Corn S i l a g e C e r e a l S i l a g e Oats B a r l e y 1 Feed Wheat Other 1. Other 2. P r o t e i n Supp. Other 3. Subclasses f o r L i v e s t o c k : 1 Cows 2 H e i f e r Calves 3 Steer Calves 4 Bred Replacement H e i f e r s 5 Y e a r l i n g H e i f e r s 6 Y e a r l i n g Steers 7 B u l l s 8 Y e a r l i n g Feeders 9 2 Yr. Feeders 10 C u l l s - 195 '-Column Code Column D e s c r i p t i o n Input Table 10 91 00 05 10 91 00 18 Opening Feed I n v e n t o r i e s : Grass Hay : Other 3. Table: 4 Cards: 4.011 to 4.141 C o l . : 51 g 61 10 94 00 01 • 10 94 00 18 Feed T r a n s f e r : Winter Range : Other 3. 20 95 00 01 20 95 00 04 Year 1: Own Crop Land: Winter Range : : F a l l Range Note: Own range i s not t r e a t e d as a l i m i t i n g f a c t o r . 20 95 00 05 20 95 00 16 Year 1: Own Crop Land: Grass Hay • : Other 2. Table: 4 Cards: 4.011 to 4.121 C o l s . : 11 g 21 20 85 00 01 20 85 00 04 Year 1: Leased Range Land: Winter Range • : F a l l Range Table: 4 Cards: 451 to 4.181 C o l s . : 21 g 31 20 85 00 05 20 85 00 16 Year 1: Leased Crop Land: Grass Hay : Other 2. Table: 4 Cards: 4.011 to 4.121 C o l s . : 31 g 41 30 95 00 01 30 95 00 16 Year 2: Feed Sup p l i e s (as above) Table: 5 (as above) 40 95 00 01 40 95 00 16 Year 3: Feed S u p p l i e s (as above) Table: 6 (as above) 10 9 2 0 0 0 5 10 92 00 18 s Year 1: Crop Purchases: Grass Hay : Other 3. - 196 -Column Code Column D e s c r i p t i o n Input Table 20 92 00 05 20 92 00 18 Year 2: Crop Purchases: Grass Hay : Other 3. Table: 13 Cards: 13.011 to 13.141 C o l s . : 11 g 21 30 92 00 05 30 92 00 18 Year 3: Crop Purchases: Grass Hay : Other 3. Table: 13 Cards: 13.011 t o 13.141 C o l s . : 31 g 41 10 93 00 05 10 93 00 16 Year 1: Crop S a l e s : Grass Hay : Other 2 Table: 11 Cards: 11.011 to 11.121 C o l s . : 11 g 21 20 93 00 05 20 93 00 16 Year 2: Crop S a l e s : Grass Hay : Other 2. Table: 11 Cards: 11.131 to 11.241 C o l s . : 11 g 21 30 93 00 05 30 93 00 16 Year 3: Crop S a l e s : Grass Hay Table: 11 Cards: 11.131 t o 11.211 C o l s . : 31 g 41 11 95 00 01 11 95 00 18 Year 1: T o t a l Winter Feed: Winter Range : Other 3. 12 95 00 02 12 95 00 18 Year 1: T o t a l Spring Feed: Spring Range • : Other 3. 13 95 00 03 13 95 00 18 Year 1: T o t a l Summer Feed: Summer Range : Other 3. 14 95 00 04 14 95 00 18 Year 1: T o t a l F a l l Feed: F a l l Range : Other 3. - 197' -Column Code Column D e s c r i p t i o n Input Table 11 71 00 01 11 71 00 10 Year 1: Winter Opening L i v e s t o c k : Cows C u l l s T a b le: 1 Cards: 1.011 t o 1.101 C o l s . : 11 g 21 11 72 00 01 11 72 00 10 Year 1: Winter Purchases of L i v e -stock: Cows C u l l s T a b le: 3 11 73 00 01 11 73 00 10 Year 1: Winter Sales o f L i v e s t o c k : Cows C u l l s 11 74 00 01 11 74 00 10 Year 1: Winter C l o s i n g L i v e s t o c k : Cows : C u l l s 12 72 00 01 Year 1: Spring Opening L i v e s t o c k : Cows 14 74 00 10 Year 1: F a l l C l o s i n g L i v e s t o c k : C u l l s 20 72 00 01 20 72 00 10 Year 2: L i v e s t o c k Purchases: Cows C u l l s Table:. 3 Cards: 3.101 to 3.181 C o l s . : 11,21,31 g 41 20 73 00 01 20 73 00 10 Year 2: L i v e s t o c k S a l e s : Cows : C u l l s T a b le: 2 Cards: 2.111 to 2. 201 C o l s . : l l , 2 1 \ g 31 - 198 -Column Code Column D e s c r i p t i o n Input Table 20 73 00 01 20 73*00 10 Year 2: L i v e s t o c k S a l e s : Cows • • • • : C u l l s Table: 2 Cards: 2.111 to 2. 201 C o l s . : 11,21S 31 20 74 00 01 • • 20 74*00 10 Year 2: C l o s i n g L i v e s t o c k : Cows • • • : C u l l s 30 72 30 74 00 01 00 10 Year 3: L i v e s t o c k Purchases: Cows Year 3: C l o s i n g L i v e s t o c k : C u l l s Table: 2 8 3 (as above) 10 76 00 00 • 30 76 00 00 Year 1: Cash L i v e s t o c k Expenses • • • • Year 3: Cash L i v e s t o c k Expenses Table 10: C o l . : Table 10: C o l . : 10 61 10 65 10 65 00 01 00 01 ' 00 12 Year 1: Opening Cash: January Year 1: C l o s i n g Cash: January-Year 1: C l o s i n g Cash: December Table: 17 Card: 17.011 C o l . : 31 10 55 10 55 00 01 00 12 Year 1: Cash Loan: January Year 1: Cash Loan: December Tab l e : 19 Cards: 19.061 S 19.062 C o l s . : 21 t o 71 S 11 to 61 - 199 -Column Code Column D e s c r i p t i o n i n p u t Table 10 45 00 01 10 45 00 12 Year 1: Term Loan: January-Year 1: Term Loan: December Table: 19 Cards: 19.0 51 to 19 .132 C o l s . : 21 to 71 S 11 t o 61 10 35 00 01 10 35 00 12 Year 1: Other Cash R e c e i p t s : January Year 1: Other Cash R e c e i p t s : December Table::19 Cards: 19.011 to 19.211 ( e x c l . above) C o l s . : (as above) 10 25 00 01 10 25 00 12 Year 1: Cash Expenses: January Year 1: Cash Expenses: December Table: 2 0 20 65 00 12 30 25 00 12 Year 2: Opening Cash: January Year 3: Cash Expenses: December (as above) - 200 -IDENTIFICATION OF ROW CODES AND ROW CONTROLS Row Code D e s c r i p t i o n 10 95 00 01 Last Winter : Feed S u p p l i e s : Winter Range (A.U.M.) 10 95 ' 00 18 : Other 3. ( l b . ) 20 95 00 01 F i r s t Year: Feed S u p p l i e s : Winter Range (A.U.M.) 20 95 00 18 : Other 3. ( l b . ) 30 95 00 01 Second Year : Feed A l l o c a t i o n : Winter Range (A.U.M.) 30 95 00 18 : Other 3. ( l b . ) 40 95 00 01 T h i r d Year: Feed A l l o c a t i o n : Winter Range (A.U.M.) 40 95 00 18 : Other 3. ( l b . ) 11 95 00 01 1st Winter: Feed A l l o c a t i o n : Winter Range (A.U.M.) 11 95 00 18 : Other 3. ( l b . ) 12 95 00 01 1st S p r i n g : Feed A l l o c a t i o n : Winter Range (A.U.M.) 14 95* 00 18 1st F a l l : Feed A l l o c a t i o n : Other 3. ( l b . ) 11 75 00 01 1st Winter: L i v e s t o c k C o n t r o l : Cows • 11 75 00 10 1st Winter: L i v e s t o c k C o n t r o l : C u l l s - 201 -Row Code D e s c r i p t i o n 12 75 00 01 14 95 00 01 1st S p r i n g : L i v e s t o c k C o n t r o l : Cows 1st F a l l : L i v e s t o c k C o n t r o l : C u l l s 20 75 00 01 30 75 00 01 2nd Year: L i v e s t o c k C o n t r o l : Cows 3rd Year: L i v e s t o c k C o n t r o l : C u l l s 10 65 00 01 • 10 65 00 12 1st Year: Cash C o n t r o l : January 1st. Year: Cash C o n t r o l : December 20 65 00 12 30 65 00 12 2nd Year: Cash C o n t r o l 3rd Year: Cash C o n t r o l HIST BAS'OUT I " J i ' r Bff:F 60 • L 40)50003 119 L 131500 )8 170 r 147500O1 2 ROWS 61 t 40-) 50 004 120 I. 1 )150CO9 »7) r 14 751C02 3 'I looeoooo 62 I 43)50005 I? 1 13)51010 180 c: 14 7 5000 3 4 I 10)5)001 63 L 43)50006 122 i_ 13150011 101 c 14750004 5 L 10)50002 64 L 40150007 123 i _ 13 )5(!0'2 182 F. 14750005 6 L 1315)003 65 L 4095POOO 124 L 11V5S013 18? IT 14750036 7 L 1 J)5 30 34 66 L 40.150001 125 . ^ 13>50014 184 C 14750007 a U 1005)005 67 L 40950010 126 L 11)50015 135 r 147SO008 9 L 10)50006 68 L 40150011 127 l_ 13150016 186 F. 14750009 n L 10959307 69 L 40150012 128 1. 13 )50017 187 r- 1475001J u U 10150003 70 L 40150013 129 1. 1395OC10 133 c 20750001 L 10151009 71 I 40)50014 130 149500H 139 " 20750002 n l 10950010. 72 L 41150015 131 (, 149500J2 , 190 P 20750003 14 L 10)50011 73 I 40)50016 132 L 141500 )3 ' 191 F 20750C04 15 I 10730012 74 L 40)50H7 13? L 14950014 192 r. 21750005 L6 L 10119013 75 I 40)50015 134 L 141500)5 193 e 20750006 .17 L 1015.3014 76 L Ui5onoi 135 L 1V)51016 194 r 20 7 50007 10 L 10)50015 77 t U950002 136 1495)007 195 *: 20/50000 19 L 13)50016 73 L 11151013 137 L 14950008 196 r 23753009 20 L 10)50017 79 I 11950004 138 14150(.09 197 F 20750010 21 I 10)50010 80 L 11)50005 139 i. 149 50010 198 r 30750001 2 j I 2>>5.)001 ni L 11950006 140 • L 14950011 199 r. 3C7500O2 23 L 2 9950PO?. 82 I H950007 141 1. 14950012 200 r 30750003 24 L 20750003 83 L 1195)010 142 L 1495Q0.13 201 r 30750004 25 I 201'10014 84 L 11959019 14 3 L 14959014 202 F 30J50C05 26 L 20)50005 85 U 11950010 144 t 14 15001 5 203 C 30750016 27 L 23050006 86 . L 11150011 145 L 149 50016 204 ri 30750007 28 L 21150007 87 L 11950012 146 L 1'. )50017 205 IS 30750008 21 I ?.K'50003 88 I 11950013 147 L 14)50018 206 C 30753C99 ?9 L 20150C09 89 L 11951314 143 . n • 11750001 217 e 30750010 31 t 23950010 90 L 11950015 149 " 117500 32 2C8 L 106 50001 •a •> L 20)50011 91 L 11150016 150 11750003 209 L 10650002 33 L 20130012 92 L 11)50017 151 c 11 7500)4 210 L 10653003 3* L 20)5001? 03 I 11 )50018 152 F 11 75)C05 211 L 101,5 0004 35 L 23)50014 94 L U9500DI 153 c 11750006 212 L 10650005 36 L 20)50015 95 L 12950002 154 r 1.1 750007 21? L 106 50C06 37 L 20)50)16 96 L 12 )50003 155 c 1175)008 214 C 10650007 3*1 L 20150017 «.7 I 12950004 156 r. 11750009 215 L 10650008 39 L 20)50018 "8 I 12950095 157 e 11750010 216 L 10650009 40 L 30»50OOl 99 U 12 )530 36 155 r 11750001 217 t 19650010 41 L 331500)2 100 L 12150007 159 z 12750012 218 L 105 50011 4? L 3015C003 101 I 12 )50008 150 r. 12 75 )00 3 219 L 106 50012 43 U V31500J4 102 1 12)530C1 161 C 1275300'. 220 L 20650012 44 L 30950005 103 I 12)50010 162 c 1275)005 221 L 30450012 45 L 30)50fC6 104 L 1J1500'. 1 163 c 12 750C06 46 L 30?5)C07 105 I 12*51012 164 e 12750007 47 t. 33133008 106 I 12 750013 165 r 12 750018 41 JJO'iOOOl 107 L 12150014 166 12 7 50009 49 I 30950010 108 I 12150015 167 c 12/5O010 51 t 30950011 109 t 12)50016 163 F 13 750011 51 L 30)50012 110 I 12 )50017 169 c 13 750032 I 30150013 I U L 12)50010 170 137DOC03 52 . L 33150014 112 L 13 )50001 171 r 13750034 54 L 33150015 113 L 13950002 172 r 13753005 55 L 30)50016 114 L 119 5O0O3 173 p H'50006 56 L 30)50017 115 L 1395J304 174 r 13750007 57 L 30350013 116 L 13950005 175 • e 11750008 5a L 40150001 117 t 11950096 176 1= 1375JCC9 59 L 40951002 118 I 139500O7 17 T r 13750010 - 203 -o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o * ooooooocoo^: o c c c o o o< o c o o o o o o n w i - i c o o o o oi *— •— 1— o o o o o o o o o O J 0 J O c -r- rf* *- J-o C O O O ^ c o O Q O O O 3 n O _ ,— o o rv *- r - O O ^ i ^  «— r * M f» I J *— O o o o o o o o o ^ - i O >/l iD o J) A. ui vn Ul Ul wfl J l Ul -I O O O o o o o o w c o a o o o o t- •- »- o o o fv N 1- © «-• 1 «— 1 1 t-1 m • • • • Cl Ul wi Ul Wi « l " « ' i ; x - J G O O O O O O C C O O O O O - o P -a o «a <* ,o'o o o o o o o o o o o o i o .n o ,r, o »J rt r» o *r. c iOUiOuiCU»0 » J*>Oui*^uiO ( i V O u O ' O O O i r i " . i O O O w • o »-* o o»-* O O O O O O >OWOr«jOi— 000«yOcx>0 I la O I I I O •"- O H* O o»- o • • • OOO O l O l O t O I — © o o o o o o o o * o • © • o • C • o*> o • o • o • o f J I O I o Ui c *-* o o o o o • o • I O I o © o o o • o • • o • o O I O I o I 3 O O O O Q * O •> C * o • o • o o o ul-J» W Ul ^  u* Ul ^ Ul -J -I -* U# W -# W ui- J W ' ' H J W W U W | J W W ; J U W W ^ i — w • •» w u) -J M* w u r j %> ; J O O O O O O O O O O C i O C w " - ' ^ = i o O C C j 0O«D>^ ~t >C *J '•*> O OO muiui;jiutuiu\u»u»v>i fc« yi J i JI O O O O O O O O O O J ' ^ O O O O O O O 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C O O O O O O O O O O O C O O J O O ^ c o o , - • - o >^ o o o © 0 ^ ' o O O Q O © G O O O w O C © 0 » - » - » - ~ ' - ^ WUN,rv»-»- J w n ^ U i f v - O O w O ^ ^ ^ • i • i t • < • • £ * • ' - V c / o o g V o g o g g ° ^ I I I I I vn ui. ui wi u* o o o o o O O O O o I I Ul Ul o o O Q O 0*0 U IS O <" U W «•<* u» *-* — .— 1 " ^> Zm *—^ - P« i— »- o o © o o o o o o o 3 O £ U J 4 « O >L. o o a o j a a f t O f f l a a ^ ^ - J ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ' IUUWWUI I «J B* C* «> O O CJ -»4 O • J t_J W U> *> O O C" o Ul W W t -4 - J> *»- 4> *• ** X* *• Uf w u> >» u< O O O o o o o o O O J O o o o o o o <o o o o o o o O o o o o e o o •a o o O O O o •o *> sD J> J> -a -J> m -m m •j» u> Jl U l U l ' J l \,1 U i v f l U l v n u> u> m u v U l U l u» U l U l UI U l u« U l o U l U l U l m C O O o o o o o o O C W w o o o o o o o o o o r> o o o o o o o o o c O o o o r> o OOO O O o o o o o o o o o c o o o o o o o o o o i » o o o o o c o o o o o 1 - c I> Ul <• u* rw o s * j - J ^ e* vn 4* 4" rw PNJ »- »— »— U l 4* u< ru »- o o - o o o o o o o o o o o o o s o c e c o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o c c t • 1 U» U» U". % Ui 1 m 1 u» I a u» m 1 Ul 1 Ul 1 Ul 1 Ul 1 Ul 1 m 1 Ul 1 1 u» u> 1 Ul 1 Ul o o c o o o o o u- o o 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 o o o o o o o o o OOO o o o o o O w Q •*» o o o o o »-• o o o o o o o o o o o o o o • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • a • • • • • • • OOO c o o o o o»- o «-* o o w o u» o o o c o o o o o o o <u o o o o o u o o o o o u ivi u »w o o o o u» c o o o w Uf 4 2 0 4 2 ! 4 2 7 4 2 ? 4 2 4 4 2 5 4 2 6 4 ? 7 4 2 1 4 2 9 4 3 0 4 3 1 4? 3 4 3 3 4? 4 4 3 5 4 3 6 43 7 4 3 a 4 3 1 4 4 0 44 1 4 4 2 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 ' .46 | 4 4 7 j 14 a 4 4 1 | 4 5 0 V51 1452 | 4 5 3 V54 1455 | 4 5 6 . 5 7 |45f l V5 9 | 4 6 9 |46I <t62 I 4 6 ? ^.64 1465 |4A6 . 6 7 |463 t 6 9 4 7 0 471 4 7 2 4 7 3 4 7 4 4 7 5 4 7 6 14 7 7 4 7 3 4 7 9 4 0 = 5 0 0 0 3 4 0 1 5 0 0 0 3 4 0 S 5 0 0 0 3 4 0 0 5 0 0 0 4 4 0 1 5 0 0 0 4 4 0 1 5 1 0 0 4 4 0 1 3 0 0 1 5 4 0 3 5 9 0 C 6 4 0 1 5 0 0 0 7 4 0 - 1 5 0 0 C 7 4 0 3 5 ) C 0 7 4 0 1 5 0 0 0 8 4 0 1 5 0 0 9 9 4 C 1 5 0 0 1 0 4 0 1 5 0 0 M 4 0 1 3 0 0 1 2 4 0 3 5 0 0 1 3 4 0 ? 5 0 0 1 4 4 C 1 5 0 0 1 5 4 0 1 5 0 0 1 6 1 C 9 3 0 0 0 5 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 5 1 0 9 2 0 0 0 6 1 0 9 2 0 0 0 6 1 0 9 3 0 0 0 7 1 0 9 2 0 0 0 7 1 0 9 2 0 0 9 7 1 0 9 2 C C 1 P 1 0 ^ 2 0 0 9 3 1 0 9 2 9 0 0 9 1 0 ' ' 2 0 0 0 9 101?0010 1 0 9 2 0 0 1 0 1 O T 2 0 0 H I 0 ' ) 7 0 0 l l 1 0 9 2 0 0 1 2 l 0 9 2 0 0 1 2 l 9 9 7 0 0 1 3 I . M 2 0 O 1 3 I D 200 I 3 10'200!3 1 0 9 2 0 0 1 3 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 9 2 0 0 1 3 I 0 9 2 0 O 1 ' . 1 0 9 2 0 0 1 4 1 0 9 2 0 0 ! 5 1 0 9 2 0 0 1 5 1 0 9 2 0 0 1 6 1 J 9 2 0 0 1 6 1 0 9 J 0 0 1 7 1 1 9 2 0 0 1 7 19->20013 1 0 9 2 0 0 1 8 2 0 9 2 0 0 0 5 2 0 9 2 0 0 0 5 2 0 9 2 0 0 0 5 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 6 2 0 9 2 0 0 0 6 2 0 9 2 0 0 0 6 1CCO0C0O - 0 . 6 2 4 1 0 2 0 9 2 0 0 3 7 ICOOOOOO 3 0 5 5 ) 0 0 3 - i . a o 4 3 1 2 C 9 2 O C 0 7 3C95OO07 3 0 4 5 0 0 1 2 0 . 6 2 4 1 2 20'>2(>00 7 2 0 * 5 0 0 1 2 1 1 C 0 0 O 0 O - 0 . 0 4 B 3 2 0 9 2 0 0 0 8 1001)0000 3 0 1 5 0 0 0 4 - 1 . 0 0 434 2 0 9 2 0 0 0 R 3 0 5 5 C 0 9 0 3 0 6 5 C 0 1 2 0 . 0 4 1 5 2 0 9 3 0 0 0 1 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 1 C C I T 9 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 4 0 6 2 0 9 3 0 C 0 9 1 C C C P 0 0 0 1CCCP0OQ - 5 0 0 . 0 0 4 5 7 7 0 9 2 0 0 0 9 3 C 5 5 C 0 0 9 i c c c o o o o - 7 5 . 1 2 4 8 8 2 0 9 . 3 0 0 0 9 2 06 5 0 0 1 2 4 U 5 5 0 0 0 7 - 6 0 0 0 . 0 0 4 3 9 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 0 ICCCOOOO 3 C 6 5 0 0 1 2 7 5 . 1 2 4 9 0 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 0 3 C 9 5 0 0 1 0 1C00CO0O - 5 0 0 . 0 0 4 9 1 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 0 2 C 6 5 0 0 1 2 1 C C 0 0 C O 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 4 9 2 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 1 1 rccoooo ICCOO.000 - 5 C 9 . 0 0 4 9 3 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 1 3 C 9 5 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 4 9 4 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 1 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 ICCOOOOO - 5 0 0 . 0 0 4 9 5 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 2 1CCO0OOO l r r o o c o o - 5 0 0 . 0 0 4 9 6 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 2 3 0 9 5 0 0 1 2 i c o r o o a j - 5 0 0 . 0 0 4 9 7 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 2 7 0 o 5 0 0 1 2 ICCCOOOO - 5 0 0 . 0 0 4 9 3 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 3 ICCCOOOO ICOOOOOO - 5 0 0 . 0 0 4 9 9 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 3 3 0 9 5 0 0 1 3 ICCCOOOO - 5 0 0 . 0 3 5 0 0 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 3 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 1 C 9 5 C 0 0 5 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 0 1 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 4 1 0 0 0 0 O O 0 ICCOOOOO - 5 0 0 . 0 0 5 0 2 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 4 3 0 9 5 0 9 1 4 I C 9 5 0 0 0 6 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 0 3 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 4 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 i c c o c n o o - 7 5 . 0 0 504 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 J 5 C 0 0 7 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 505 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 5 3 C 5 5 C 0 1 5 l C f 5 0 0 0 2 7 5 . 0 0 5 0 6 7 0 9 2 0 0 1 5 3 C 6 5 0 0 1 2 i c c o r o o o - 5 0 0 . 0 3 5 0 7 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 6 iOCOfiOOO 1 C 5 3 C 0 0 8 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 0 8 2 0 1 2 C 0 1 6 3 C S 5 0 0 1 6 1 C C 0 0 0 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 * 5 0 9 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 6 2 0 6 5 C 0 1 2 1 0 5 5 0 0 0 9 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 1 0 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 7 10CO0O0O ICCCOOOO - 5 0 0 . 0 0 5 1 1 2 0 9 3 0 0 1 7 3 C 9 5 0 0 1 7 1 0 5 5 0 0 1 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 1 2 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 7 2 0 * 5 0 1 1 2 ICCOOOOO - 5 0 0 . 0 0 5 1 3 2 0 7 2 0 0 1 3 ICCOOOOO 1 C 5 5 O 0 1 1 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 514 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 3 1 C 9 5 0 0 1 8 1 C C 0 0 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 5 1 5 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 3 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 ICC 5 0 0 1 2 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 • 5 1 6 3 0 9 7 0 0 0 5 ICOOOOOO i c c c r o o o - 1 1 0 . 0 0 5 1 7 3 0 9 3 O 0 0 5 4 C 1 5 0 0 0 5 1 0 9 5 0 0 1 3 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 1 1 2 0 " 2 0 0 0 5 3 C 6 5 0 0 1 2 1 C(.5( 001 5 0 . 0 0 5 1 9 3 0 9 2 0 0 0 6 locooooo I 0 f : 5 l " 0 )2 3 3 . 3 3 . 5 2 0 3 0 1 7 0 0 0 6 4 C 5 5 0 0 9 6 1 1 * 5 0 0 0 3 1 . 3 3 521 2 0 9 7 0 0 0 6 3 Co 5 0 0 1 2 1 C 6 5 0 0 1 0 0 . 33 522 3 0 9 2 0 0 0 7 i c c c o o o o 106 50 011 1 0 . 0 0 5 2 3 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 7 4 0 5 5 0 0 0 7 ICCCOOOO - 5 0 0 . 0 0 5 2 4 3 0 9 2 0 0 0 7 3 C 6 5 O 0 1 2 I C 5 3 C 0 1 4 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 525 3 0 9 2 0 0 0 3 1 C C O P 0 0 0 i coooooo - 5 0 0 . 0 0 5 2 6 3 0 9 7 0 0 0 3 4 C 9 5 0 0 0 8 1 C 9 5 O 0 1 5 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 52 7 30 >20008 3 0 ( . 5 0 0 1 2 1 coocooo - 5 0 0 . 0 0 5 2 3 3 0 9 3 0 C 0 9 ICCOOOOO l O ^ C J l t - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 2 9 2 0 9 2 0 0 0 9 4 C 5 5 0 0 O 9 1CCCC 0 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 5 3 0 3 0 9 2 0 0 0 9 3 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 1 C 1 5 9 3 1 7 - 2 C 0 0 . 0 531 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 0 ICCCOOOO ICCOOOOO - 5 0 0 . 0 0 532 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 0 4 0 9 5 0 0 1 0 I C 5 5 0 0 1 8 - 2 C 0 0 . 0 5 3 3 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 0 3 C 6 5 O 0 1 2 ICCOOOOO - 5 0 0 . 0 0 534 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 1 ICCCOOOO 3 C 5 5 C 0 0 5 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5? 5 ' 3 0 9 2 3 0 1 1 4 0 9 5 0 0 1 1 2 C 6 5 0 0 1 2 5 0 0 . 0 0 53 6 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 1 3 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 ICOOOOOO - 5 0 0 . 0 0 5 3 7 3 0 9 7 0 0 1 2 ICOOOOOO 3 C S 5 0 0 0 6 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 3 3 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 2 4 C 9 5 0 0 1 2 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 5 0 0 . 0 0 5 3 9 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 2 3 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 - 7 5 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 7 5 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 C 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 C 0 0 . 0 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 1 2 5 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 1 2 5 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . C O - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 C 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 C 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 . C 0 0 . 0 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 C O . 0 O - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 C O O . 0 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 7 5 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 7 5 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 3 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 0 0 . 0 0 5 4 0 5 4 1 5 4 2 543 544 5 4 5 5 4 6 54 7 5 4 8 5 4 9 5 5 0 5 5 1 5 5 2 5 5 3 554 5 5 5 5 5 6 5 5 7 5 5 0 5 5 9 5 6 0 561 562 563 564 56 5 5 6 6 5 6 7 5 6 8 5 6 9 5 70 571 572 573 574 575 576 5 7 7 5 7 8 5 7 9 00 531 82 583 514 585 536 5 8 7 5 8 8 5 8 9 5 9 0 591 592 593 594 595 5 ) 6 5 9 7 1 5 9 8 5 9 9 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 3 3 0 1 2 0 0 1 3 3 C 9 2 0 0 1 3 3 0 9 7 0 0 1 4 3 0 1 2 0 0 1 4 3 0 9 3 0 0 1 4 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 5 3 0 0 2 0 0 1 5 3 0 9 7 0 0 1 5 3 3 9 2 0 0 1 6 3 0 1 2 0 0 1 6 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 6 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 7 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 7 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 7 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 0 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 8 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 8 1 0 9 3 0 0 0 5 1 0 9 3 0 0 0 5 1 0 9 3 0 0 0 6 1 0 9 3 0 0 0 6 1 0 9 3 0 0 0 7 1 0 9 3 0 P 1 7 1 0 9 3 0 0 0 7 1 0 9 3 0 0 0 8 1 9 9 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 0 C 9 1 0 9 3 0 0 0 9 1 0 9 3 0 0 1 0 109 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 9 3 0 0 1 1 1 0 9 3 0 0 1 1 1 0 9 3 O O 1 2 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 1 0 9 3 0 0 1 3 109 3 0 0 1 3 1 0 9 3 0 0 1 4 1 0 9 3 0 0 1 4 1 0 9 3 0 0 1 5 1 0 9 3 0 0 1 5 1 0 9 3 0 0 1 6 1 0 9 3 0 0 1 6 2 0 9 3 0 0 0 5 2 0 9 3 0 0 0 5 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 6 2 O 3 - 0 G 0 6 2 0 9 3 0 0 0 7 2 0 9 3 0 0 0 7 2 0 9 3 0 0 0 7 2 0 9 3 0 0 0 8 2 0 9 3 0 0 0 8 2 0 13OC09 2 0 9 3 0 0 0 9 2 0 9 3 0 0 1 0 7 0 9 3 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 3 0 0 1 1 2 0 9 3 0 0 1 1 2 0 9 3 0 0 1 2 2 0 9 3 0 0 1 2 ICCCOOOO 4 0 9 5 0 0 1 3 3 0 6 5 0 C 1 2 ICCOOOOO 4 0 5 5 0 0 1 4 3 C 6 5 0 0 1 2 I f CCl" 0 0 0 4 C 9 5 C 0 1 5 3 C 6 5 0 0 1 2 ICCCOOOO 4 0 9 50016 3 0 6 5 0 0 1 ? ICOOOOOO 4 C 9 5 0 0 1 7 3C/-.50012 i c c c o o o o 4 0 9 5 0 0 ! .3 3 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 1 0 C 0 0 0 O 0 1 C 5 5 0 0 0 5 l c c c r o )0 1 0 5 5 C 0 0 6 ICCCOOOO 1 C 1 5 O 0 0 7 10<;500 04 i c c c c o o o 1C95000.3 1 C C 0 0 0 0 0 1 C 9 5 0 0 0 9 i coconoo I C 9 5 O 0 1 0 1 0 C Q 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 5 C 9 1 1 ICCCOOOO 1 0 9 5 C 0 1 2 ICOOOOOO I C 5 5 0 C 1 3 l o< oi.ooo 1 C 5 5 0 0 1 4 ICCCOOOO 1 C 5 5 0 0 1 5 10C000CO . 1 0 9 5 0 0 1 6 ICOOOOOO 3 0 5 5 0 C 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 5 C C 0 6 l r c o c o o o 30 . 5 0 0 0 7 2 C 6 5 0 0 1 2 10CCC0O0 3 0 9 5 0 0 0 8 ICOOOOOO 3 0 9 5 0 0 C 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 C 9 5 0 0 1 0 1OCCO00O 3 C 9 5 0 0 1 1 ICCCOOOO 3 0 9 5 0 0 1 2 - 1 3 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 1 3 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 5 C 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 C 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 C 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 C 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 0 0 0 . 0 5 C 0 . O O 0 . 0 2 0 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 2 0 0 0 . 0 6 0 . 0 0 2 C 0 0 . 0 - 6 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 2 0 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 2 0 0 0 . 0 0 . 3 2 O O 0 . 0 0 . 0 2 0 0 0 . 0 0 . 3 2 0 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 2 0 0 0 . 0 0 . 1 2 0 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 2 0 0 0 . 0 0 . 1 2 0 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 2 0 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 2 0 C 0 . 0 •.-6 0 . 0 0 » 2 0 0 0 . 0 - 6 0 . 0 0 » o . o • 2 0 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 2 0 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 2 0 C 0 . 0 0 . 0 2 0 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 2 0 0 0 . 0 - 205 -:> c- o~ r~ f> •> c~ rr c- f** n- "> c*- c a- -T- CT- O - j - r* ~- o & o .".*• J -r-Jt vi w^. c i r.n o Ui v-i 4- ^  r- -r- J- .r- * i ^' LJ u w W ^. ^  ^  .y Jo C Ji .f- v »— <J O -^ J O v.i .T-- u. "*/ o ^  u C d *•* r v C/ •> s- Z- i> c- £ n- zr c- > c- c- c- c :? CT o- c- cr- c j - .> e- ;?- c- y-i J , J J «J • J ?\J 'v • J M I - f- r 1 tM t- ^ ^ O ^ U - ' O 11 -'-J v> O C J •T ^ '4 J- J' J. w . J r- . D -JS W .> J> ^ -W »- o — « w y U I - o _ •— *—«-•»<* *-* -ooo o o --. J J o J ^ J> Ut u» un U* U» Ul J l m Ul m Jt Ul O O O o o o o o o o o o o o o o p o o o o o o o o o o o o r— i -o o U l U l *• r j o u *-* *M * o +j o o o o o sO o ^, Ul ut -J\ Ul CI v/l vTi at •^ 1 ' J c c e~. o c o o o o o o o o o o o o & o o ooo w C O C -3 O is -1 *- o o .1 w L J ' V J w w w w w o o o Ci w ooo o o O -^ )^ +> - i ^ •«« '.1 w ^  o o o o c c ooo o c o o 3 o o o "J> o o o c o o )•* c o CV ^ c« o •0 •JO L3 » d w w « J O J — O ^  O ~ „ ~> >J ' •* »^ ' •* h-t *J *«J - a w —* *v w *4 ,*J S O O C O O U C O O O O O O Q O O 0 3 C - O 0 C O O 0 O C O 0 t - »-• 1 - »- 1- t- ^  >^ 1 o o •-• r» — o o o o n w o n r*» r> o o o o o -> 1 Ji j-) >^ o o o « -» rj o ^  O w o • Jl vr. vi ji VI o ci o Cl O vii O J* o <-n o o •!? o c •3 = -> o o O 3 C 5 c o o o o s o o o w o O O O O 2 o k*>o o o c; o o o o & o o c. o u o w o o o c o c ^- ft) r- O » - O C » - i - o o o o u> <J1 o- o Ul O ^ OW O M o o o o 1 » - 1 1 o o o o o o o . o _ o o o o o o o • O • O • O • C • O • O" o• o* o • o • o • o• o * O O O O O o < M M o o o o o o O o o l o o o c o O o O w o o o o o o o • O O • Jl • a o • o • o o • o o • • o • o o • o • o • O • o c- o o o o o o o o • . e» o 1>J M J 'jl W b> wl M W w '«« y u» w f J f J f J r\» r j ru >U (V ;w W W 1 J N N tU rv • J iu *v (U IW Fv frf a O w O O ^  O <C O A c a -J o ^ O o w o O- ^  a w \,n j i J H / I jt \n i)i ui vi Ji yi ifi v/1 vi ^  J 1 Ci o C- vi -*> J* -1 u» Ui u> u» CH ^  •«A cn v J I jt *n o Jt ui U> Ul J» u» Ul Jl Ul Ul Ul Ul u« Jl U» Ui Ul v» u» Jl O O O C O O O O C o o o o C o c o c c o o c c r- o o o c OOO •O C/ c o o o w w = w Z> O- o o OOOC.OOOOOOCOCOODOOOOC o o o o o C o o o O o o o c c o o o o o O O O o o o o o o o o c. o o o o o - H . ^ . ^ j c O O c o o o c o o C* o o o o o O — r-* i M M " O i l ' »l W M W i - C O O J <C a> J3 -4 -4 vn Jl X a> - i - J o c* Jl Jl 4> V i*> f r-«- o o ^ «4 !> u* U) O N J F V S I O Ul o w rj> * J 4> o ^  4) o U> Ul V.1 J l Ul o o o o c o o O O u> o o CJ W O <-I O U* •fl J « l O v") >£) U l U* Ul U* J l Ul c n o o o o o o o o o o • 4 e- u» u* nun j> o Ul Ul J l n o o o o o t— > - • — » - • - • — o o o O U» CJ ui « O *> «U •Jl Ul .1 O 1o o o n • Ci O U Q I w a w c 3 w r i w r i > . j o u o i v o w n M oi« u r » n i« o u o w o IJ n iv o .T v «o o .T «; >^ o o o o ^ ( L i ^ j i i i / i C J i n ^ o v vi -i .*) M3 Z> *L> J l Jl Ul Ul U» Jl Jl O Ul Ul Ui J l V"" Ui Ui J l O Ul Ui J l U"- Ul Ul U ' J» ui u i u i c u* Jl o ui ci o o o o o n ' ^ O f ^ - ' j ^ c - i o o o o o o o o o c o o o o o o o o c o ^ ^oooooor joooc*ooooc c o o o o o o o o o oc c o o o c Ci)OOOOWwr-f-t-^-»-^»-^»-^»-r---»-*-»-t-»-OJaOOOOO iw n o o J»rf» J» *3 XI W »*» Ul U^  Jt Ui Jt U* U< o i» C o -3 — O Ct O O O 3 O — o *-* J i J.M N » .». CO~jC>Ul< vVJ'J'— C>0 33 J> -J> w ru O + 4>J>4'J>4**>J* -P V 4> «** J> > •** U W u< UtUtUiUlV»UlUlU»UlUl UtUiV"lUl.Ul\/IU»Ut Jl O O o o o O O O C O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o c o O C O O O C O O O »— ^ - I — f— c. o o o o O. G o o o o o **"'*•** f-i-OoocaiD-j^cc-J'^^-i-ca'-j *> o «? >£> vn ui o o o o o o jo < o « o c > n o ^ i . i j i ^ i . i J i Ul Ul Ul U. Ul U l Ul U* J l C l U * U l J t "U* VI ooooQ-aooococ-c oo OOCOO-^T-OOOCiOCfOO f - » - U i O O O O O O C ; 0 0 0 0 ' -OO<O>0C0D«JiJ0' P - U 1 U I 4 ^ 4>03 f r - i f l ^ t f l t - t * - * ! * - ! O v*» Ul u» o o o CM 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 745 74 7 7'.5 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 75o 757 753 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 763 769 770 771 773 773 774 775 776 777 773 779 780 781 732 733 784 735 786 |7£7 788 789 790 791 792 |793 794 |79 5 796 1797 ]79 8 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 2 1 49 50 0 ! 2 1 4 9 50,013 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 3 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 4 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 4 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 5 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 5 14 ' 5 0 0 1 6 1 4 1 5 0 9 1 6 1 4 ) 5 0 0 1 7 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 7 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 8 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 8 1 1 7 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 7 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 7 1 0 0 9 ? 1 1 7 1 9 0 0 2 1 1 ' 1 0 0 0 3 1 1 7 1 0 0 0 3 1 1 7 1 0 0 0 4 1 1 7 1 9 0 0 4 1 1 7 1 0 0 0 5 1 1 7 1 0 0 0 5 1 1 7 1 1006 1171P006 1 1 7 1 0 0 0 7 1 1 7 1 0 0 0 7 U 7 1 0 C C 8 1 1 7 1 0 0 0 3 1 1 7 1 0 0 0 9 1 1 7 1 ) 0 0 9 l m c o i o 1 1 7 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 7 ? 0 0 0 ! 1 1 7 2 J 0 0 1 1 1 7 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 7 2 ) 0 1 2 1 1 7 2 0 0 1 2 . 1 1 7 2 0 0 0 2 1 1 7 2 0 0 0 3 1 1 7 2 0 C 0 3 1 1 7 2 0 0 0 3 1 1 7 2 1 0 0 4 1 1 7 2 0 0 0 4 1 1 7 * 0 0 0 4 1 1 7 2 0 C 0 5 1 1 7 2 0 0 0 5 1 1 7 2 0 0 0 5 1 1 7 2 0 0 C 6 1 1 7 2 0 0 0 6 1 1 7 2 0 0 0 6 1 1 7 2 0 0 0 7 1 1 7 2 3 0 0 7 1 1 7 2 0 0 0 7 1 1 7 2 0 0 0 8 1 1 7 2 0 0 0 8 1 1 7 2 0 0 0 8 11 7 2 0 0 0 9 1 1 7 2 ) 0 0 9 1 0 9 5 0 0 1 2 1 4 1 5 0 0 1 2 1 0 9 5 ) 3 1 3 1 4 1 5 0 0 1 3 1 0 5 5 0 0 1 4 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 4 I C S 5 0 0 1 5 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 5 1 0 1 5 0 0 1 6 ! 4 1 3 0 016 1 0 9 5 0 0 1 7 1 4 9 5 C 0 1 7 1 C 5 5 0 0 1 8 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 8 1CCCC0OO 1 1 7 5 C 0 0 1 ICCCOOOO 11 7 5 0 0 0 2 10COOCOO 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 3 ICCCOOOO 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 4 ICCCOOOO 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 5 ICCOOOOO 1 1 7 5 C 0 0 6 ICCCOOOO 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 7 10CC0OOO 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 8 10CCCCO0 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 9 10COOOO0 1 1 7 5 C 0 1 0 ICCOOOOO 1 1 7 5 0 0 3 1 1 0 * 5 0 0 0 1 1 i r o o o o o 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 2 1 C 6 5 0 0 0 1 ICCOOOOO 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 3 IOC 5 0 0 0 1 ICOOOOOO 1 1 7 5 0 0 ) ' . 1 0 6 5 0 0 0 1 lCCOOCOO I 17 5 0 0 0 5 1 0 6 5 0 0 0 1 ICCCOOOO 1 17 5 0 0 0 6 106 5 0 0 0 1 1CCOOOOO 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 7 1 C 6 5 0 0 0 1 ICCCOOOO 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 8 1 C 6 5 0 0 0 1 ICCOOOOO 11750009 1. 1." 1 . " l".' 1." 1.* 1 . - 2 6 8 . 0 0 - 1 3 5 . 0 0 - 2 0 5 . 0 0 -1. - 1 5 8 . 0 0 - 1 9 3 . 0 0 - 1 . - 2 5 8 . 0 0 - I . - 1 0 C 0 . 0 O - 1 . - 3 2 8 . 0 0 - 1 . - 4 4 8 . 0 0 - 1 . - 2 0 0 . 0 0 - 1 . - 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 - I . 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 - I C O O . O O - 1 . 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 - 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 - 1 . 1 0 0 0 . 0 3 - I C O O . O O - 1 . 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 - 1 Q 0 0 . 0 0 -I. 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 - 1 0 C O . O O - I . 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 - 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 -1. 1 0 0 3 . 0 0 - 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 •1. 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 - 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 - I . 799 8 0 0 3 0 1 8 0 2 803 304 8 0 5 3 0 6 8 0 7 3 0 3 8 0 9 3 1 0 811 312 3 1 3 314 (115 8 1 6 3 1 7 8 1 3 1 1 9 32 0 8 21 322 8 2 3 174 3 7 5 8 7 6 8 2 7 8 2 8 1 2 9 3 3 0 131 13? 133 8 3 4 3 3 5 8 3 6 8 3 7 8 3 3 3 3 9 8 4 3 341 14? 343 0 44 345 146 fl'.7 8 4 8 3 4 9 i !50 8 5 1 3 5 2 8 5 3 3 54 355 1 5 6 e57 853 1 1 7 7 0 0 0 9 1 1 7 2 0 0 1 0 1 1 7 2 0 0 1 0 1 1 7 2 0 0 1 0 1 1 7 3 ) 001 ! 1 7 3 0 0 0 1 1 1 7 3 0 0 0 2 1 1 7 3 0 0 0 2 1 1 7 3 0 0 0 3 J l 7 3 0 0 0 3 1 1 7 3 1 0 0 4 1 1 7 3 0 0 0 4 1 1 7 3 0 0 0 5 1 1 7 3 0 0 0 5 U 7 3 0 C 0 6 1 1 7 3 0 0 0 6 1 1 7 3 0 0 0 7 1 1 7 7 0 0 0 7 1 1 7 3 0 0 0 3 1 1 7 3 0 0 0 8 1 1 7 3 0 P O 9 1 1 7 3 0 C 0 9 1 1 7 3 0 0 1 0 1 1 7 3 0 0 1 0 1 1 7 4 0 C 0 1 1 1 7 4 0 C 0 1 1 1 7 4 ) 0 0 1 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 1 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 2 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 2 I 1 7 4 0 0 0 2 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 2 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 3 I I 7 4 0 0 0 ? 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 3 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 3 1 1 7 4 9 0 0 4 1 1 7 4 0 C 0 4 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 4 1 1 7 4 1 0 0 4 H 7 4 ) f 05 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 5 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 5 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 5 1 ! 7 4 0 0 0 5 1 1 7 4 0 0 C 6 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 6 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 6 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 7 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 7 1 1 7 4 0 007 11 7 4 0 0 0 7 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 7 1 1 7 4 0 C C 8 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 8 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 0 1 1 7 4 0 0 C 9 1 1 7 4 0 0 0 9 U 7 4 0 0 C 9 11740010 I C 6 5 0 0 0 1 10C0OO0O 11 73001 0 1 0 6 5 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 . 0 0 0 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 1 K C C f 0 0 0 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 2 K C C O C O O 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 3 lCCCCOOO 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 4 ICOOOOOO 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 5 l c c o o o o o 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 6 ICCOOOOO 11 7 5 C 1 0 7 ICCCOOOO 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 U 0 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 9 ICCCOOOO 1 1 7 5 0 0 1 0 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 1 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 7 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 1 1 7 7 5 0 0 0 1 1195C 0 0 7 1 1 9 5 C 0 1 3 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 2 12 7 5 0 3 3 2 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 7 1 1 9 5 0 0 1 3 1 1 7 5 J O 0 3 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 3 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 1 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 7 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 4 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 4 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 1 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 7 1 1 9 5 0 0 1 3 1 1 1 5 C C 0 5 1 3 7 5 0 0 0 5 1 1 5 5 C 0 0 1 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 6 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 6 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 1 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 7 1 1 1 5 0 0 1 3 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 7 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 7 1 1 9 5 0 C 0 1 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 8 1 2 7 5 0 C 0 3 1 1 5 5 0 0 0 1 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 9 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 9 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 1 1000.00 8 5 9 1 1 7 4 0 0 1 0 1 1 7 5 0 0 1 0 1 . — 1000.00 8 6 0 1 1 7 4 0 0 1 0 1 2 7 5 0 0 1 0 -1.00 •1. ICOO.OO 361 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 1 ICOOOOOO 1000.00 8 6 2 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 1 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 1 - 1 . 1. 0.0 0 6 3 1272 0 0 0 1 K C 5 C P 0 4 ' i c c o . o o 0.0 864 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 2 1 C O Q 0 0 3 3 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 1. 86 5 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 2 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 2 - 1 . 0.0 866 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 2 1 06 5 " 004 1000.00 1. 86 7 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 . 0 3 0.0 168 1 7 7 2 9 0 0 3 1 2 7 5 0 C C 3 - 1 . 1. 8 6 9 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 3 1 0 6 5 C P 3 4 lOCO.OO 8 7 0 1 2 7 2 0 0 3 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 . 0 0 1. 0 . 3 8 7 1 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 4 12 7 5 0 0 0 4 - 1 . 0.0 3 7 2 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 4 1 0 6 5 1 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 . 0 3 1. 373 1 2 7 2 O C 0 5 1 C C C f 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 0 . 0 3 0 . 0 3 7 4 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 5 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 5 -1. 1 . 375 1 2 7 2 O C 0 5 1 0 6 5 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 8 7 6 1 2 7 2 O C 0 6 ICCCOOOO - 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0.0 3 7 7 1 2 7 2 0 0 1 6 > 2 7 5 0 0 0 6 1 . 0.0 8 7 0 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 6 1 0 6 5 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 1. 8 7 9 1 2 7 2 0 0 C 7 ICCOOOOO - 1 0 0 0 .00 0.0 380 1 2 7 2 0 9 0 7 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 7 - 1 . 1. 8 8 1 1 2 7 2 O 0 0 7 1 0 6 5 0 0 0 4 1000.00 0 . 0 8 3 2 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 8 ICCCOOOO - 1 0 0 0 . 0 3 883 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 3 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 3 -1. 1 . 2 2 4 0 . 0 0 8 8 4 . 1 2 7 2 O 0 C 3 1 C 6 5 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 -1.00 3 8 5 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 9 ICCOOOOO • -1 0 0 0 . 0 3 8 8 6 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 9 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 9 - i . 2 1 6 0 . 0 0 8 0 7 1 2 7 2 0 C C 9 1 C 6 5 0 0 0 4 1000.00 1. 5 4 0 . 0 0 333 1277.001,0 -ICCCOOOO -ICOO.OO - 1 . 0 0 8 8 9 1 7 7 2 0 0 1 0 1 2 7 5 0 0 1 0 -1. 3 9 0 1 2 7 2 0 0 1 0 1 C 6 5 0 C 0 4 ICOO.OO 2 1 6 0 . 0 0 891 1 2 7 3 0 0 0 1 ICOOOOOO 0 . 0 1 . 5 4 0 . 0 0 392 1 2 7 3 0 0 0 1 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 1 1 . - 1 . 0 0 8 9 3 1 2 7 3 0 0 0 2 ICCCOOOO o . o 394 1 7 7 3 0 0 ) 2 12 7 5 0 0 0 2 1 . 0.0 395 1 2 7 3 0 0 9 3 lCCCCOOO 0.0 1. 3 2 4 0 .00 8 9 6 1 2 7 3 0 0 0 3 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 3 1. - 1 . 0 0 897 1 2 7 3 0 0 ) 4 ICCOOOOO 0.0 8 9 8 1 7 . 7 3 0 0 J 4 12 7 5 0 0 0 4 1. 0.0 8 9 9 1 2 7 3 0 0 0 5 ICOOOOOO 0.0 2 7 0 0 . CO 9 0 0 1 2 7 3 0 0 0 5 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 5 1 . 1. 3 6 0 . 0 0 9 0 ] 1 2 7 ? O 0 1 6 i c o c o o o o CO -1.00 9 0 2 12 73 3016 1 2 7 5 0 0 C 6 1 . 903 12 73009 7 lCCCOCOO 0.0 1. 0.0 904 1 2 7 3 O 0 0 7 ! 2 7 5 0 0 0 7 1 . \ . 0.0 -1.00 0.0 4625.00 925.00 9 0 5 1 7 7 3 O O J 0 ICCCOOOO 9 1 6 1 2 7 2 0 0 1 8 1 2 7 5 C 0 3 8 1. J-9 0 7 1 2 7 3 O C 0 9 lCCCCOOO 0.0 9 0 8 1 2 7 3 1 0 0 9 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 9 1. 1 . 9 0 1 1 2 7 3 O 0 1 0 i c c c c o o o 0.0 -1.00 9 1 0 1 2 7 3 0 0 1 0 12 75001 0 1. 9 1 1 12 74001) . 1 2 9 5 0 0 0 2 0.0. 1. 0.0 912 1 2 7 4 3 0 ) 1 12 73Q3Q1 1. -1.00 9 1 3 1 2 7 4 0 0 0 1 1 3 7 5 C 0 0 1 - 0 . 9 0 9 1 4 1 2 7 4 0 0 U I 1 3 7 5 C 0 0 2 - 0 . 4 5 1. 0.0 9 1 5 1 2 7 4 0 0 ' ) 1 1 3 7 5 0 0 0 3 -0. 4 5 -1.00 9 1 6 1 2 7 4 0 0 0 1 1 3 7 5 0 0 1 0 - 0 . 1 0 9 1 7 1 7 7 4 0 0 0 7 1 2 7 5 0 C 0 2 1 . 0.0 9 1 0 1 2 7 4 0 0 0 2 1 3 7 5 0 0 J 4 -0.0 919 12740002 13750005 - i . n o 979 13730002 920 12740033 12750 303 « 8 0 I 3730003 921 12 740 09 3. 1375CO06 -1 . 0 0 9 o l I 3730003 922 12743004 129500)2 0 . 0 982 13730004 933 12 740004 12 75OC04 933 13 730004 924 1274000'. 1175CC01 - 1 . 0 0 934 13 730005 925 12740004 13750002 - 0 . 5 0 . 935 13730005 5 2 5 12 7.CO J'. 13750003 - 0 . 5 0 9 36 1 37 30006 927 12 740 004 13)50010 - 0 . 0 987 13 731006 923 127400J5 12950002 0 . 3 993 13730006 929 12740005 12750005 939 13/3000 7 130 12740035 13750004 - 1 . 0 0 990 13730007 931 12743006 12950002 0 . 0 991 13731C08 932 12740006 12750C06 992 13710003 93? 12 74)006 13750008 - 1 . 0 0 993 13730009 934 12740CC7 11950002 0 . 0 994 13730CC9 935 12 740007 12750007 995 13730010 926 12740007 13750007 - 1 . 0 0 996 1 3 730010 937 12 7 40CC8 12950002 o . o 997 137 )0010 93 3 12 740003 12750008 990 13/31010 939 12 740003 13750009 -1.00 995 13770001 940 12 7VJCC9 12950302 0 . 0 1000 1 1770002 941 12 741C09 12 7 50009 1001 13770003 942 12 74)009 13750009 - 1 .00 1002 13770004 943 12740010 I 2? 50002 0 . 0 1003 13771005 944 12 740010 12750010 !004 13770006 94 5 127-.0 010 13750010 - 1 . 0 0 1005 13770007 946 11720001 l o c r c o o o - l o o o . o o 1006 13770009 947 13720001' 13750001 - • 1007 137 700C9 5 43 13 720001 1C6 50006 1000.00 100.3 13770010 341 13 720002 i c c o n o o - l o o o . o o 1101 13740001 550 1 3/20002 13 750002 - 1010 13740001 951 I I721P02 1 CA 50(106 l o o o . o o 1011 13740011 152 13 720P13 10CCOC0O - 1 0 0 0 . 0 3 1012 13740002 953 1 3 7200)3 13750003 - 1013 13740002 954 13 72000 3 1C650006 i c o o . o o 1014 13740003 155 13 720094 10000110 - 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 1015 137VOOC3 956 13720004 1375CO04 - 1016 13740004 95 7 1 3 720004 1C650006 l o o o . o o 1)1 7 13740004 553 13720005 1COOOOOO - 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 1013 1374 )C04 959 13720OO5 13750005 - 1019 13740015 960 13720005 1 0 50 006 l o o o . o o 1020 13740005 061 1 3 720006 100COO0O - l o o o . o o 1031 13740005 962 13 72OC06 1 1 751006 - 1022 1 3 7-40006 963 13720C06 13650006 1000 .00 1023 13 740006 064 13723007 1CC0CC00 -1000.00 102 4 13741006 965 1J72OO07 13750007 - 1025 13740007 56ft 13720007 10650 306 ICOO.OO 1026 13 740 00 7 967 13 720008 1 cc'coooo -1000 .03 1027 13/40007 163 13 72000 8 111 5000 8 - 1023 1374)003 969 13720003 10650006 1000 .00 1029 1 374.1003 570 1372CC09 1C000300 -1000 .00 1030 13/40003 971 1 1720009 13750009 - 1031 1 374 3009 9/2 1372J009~ 106 50005 1000 .00 103 2 13 740CC9 973 11720010 ICCCCOOO -1000 .00 103 3 13740009 974 13720010 13750310 -] 1034 13740010 975 13720010 IC650006 1000.00 1035 11740010 976 13730C01 1OC0OO00 0 . 0 1926 13740010 977 13730001 1375CO01 • 1037 14720001 973 13730002 lCCCCCOO 0 . 0 1038 14720001 1375P002 1. •1039 14720001 10650C09 1000.00 1CCCO00O 0.0 1040 14729002 ICCOOOOO. - 1 0 0 0 .00 I 3750003 1. • 1041 14720002 1475C002 - I . 10000 )00 0.0 1042 14720002 10650009 10CO.OO 137500C4 1. 1 04 3 14721003 1OCCO00O - i c o o . o o i c r o o o o o o . o 1044 14720002 1 .750003 -1. 1375C005 1 . 10 45 14720003 1C65C009 1 0 0 0 . 0 3 l c r c o r o o 297.00 1946 14720004 1CCCOOOO • -1000.00 1.3 7 50096 1. 1047 14720004 14750304 -1. 1065C008 -297.00 1 048 14720004 1O55C009 1000.00 ICCCCOOO 0.0 1049 14720005 i c r o o o o o - 1 0 0 0 . 0 3 13750007 1. • 1050 14/20005 14750005 -1. i ccooooo 0.0 1051 14720005 1C650C09 1000.00 13 i 50118 1. 1052 14720006 i coocooo - 1 0 0 0 . 0 3 10000000 0.0 1153 . 14720006 1475C006 -1. 137500C9 1. 1054 14720006 IC650009 i c o o . o o ICCCCOOO 240.00 1055 14720007 1C0COOJO - 1 3 0 0 . 0 0 13750 010 1. 1056 147200.17 14750007 -1. 10650006 -40.00 1057 14720017 1 C65O010 1300.00 106 5010 7 -200.00 105.3 14 72 3009 10100030 -1000.00 1375COC1 1 . 1059 14720C03 14750033 -1. 13750012 1. 1060 14720C0B I O 5 0 C 0 9 f 1000 .03 13750003 1. 1061 . 14720009 ICCOOOOO - i c o o . o o 13750004 1. 1067 14720009 14750009 - 1 . 13750C05 1. 1063 14720019 1 0650C09 1000.00 13750006 1. 1064 14 720010 10CCCC00 -1000.00 13750007 1. 106 5 14720010 14750010 -1. 13750000 1. 1066 .14720010 106 51009 1000.00 13750CC9 1. 1067 14730001 ICCOOOOO 0.0 I 375001 0 1. 1068 14730001 14150001 1. 13950003 3.00 1069 ' 14 7300)2 ICCOOOOO 116.00 1375CO01 1. 10 70 14730007 1 '75CC02 1. 14 750 901 1 . -1.00 1971 14730002 1 O 5 0 0 1 0 - 1 1 6 . 0 9 137500 )2 1072 1473)003 I0CCO03O 171.00 1475CO02 -1.00 1C73 - 1473)003 14750003 1. 13751003 1. 1074 14731003 1.C650010 -171.00 14750003 -1 .00 107 5 147.30004 10000 300 0.0 13550003 3.00 1076 14730004 14 (50004 1. 13 7500J4 1. 1077 14730005 3.000COOO 2 1 7 . 0 3 1'.750004 - 1 . 0 0 1073 14733005 ! '.750005 1. 13550003 3.00 1079 1473J005 106 500)9 - 2 1 7 . 0 0 13753005 1. 1030 14730006 10000003 2 9 7 . 0 0 14)50005 -1.00 1C31 14730006 1 '. 75C006 1 . 13150003 3.00 108 2 1473O0C6 10650009 •v - 2 9 7 . 0 3 13750006 1. 1033 14731C07 KUOJOOO h 276.00 1475CC06 - I . 0 0 1 034 14730007 1 .750007 1. 13950003 3.00 1085 14730007 1 0650109 -52 76. CO 13750007 1. 1035 14 73 )008 10000000 0.0 14750007 -1.00 108 7 1473)003 I4750003 I. 13550003 3.00 1033 14730009 10COOOOO 0. 0 13750108 1. 101-7 14 73 3C01 14-'50109 1. 14750008 -1.00 1090 14730010 ICCCOOOO 0.0 13950003 3.00 1011 14730010 147=-0010 1. 1 1750009 1. 1097 1 '.740001 I 4950004 0.0 14750009 -1.00 1093 14740001 14950-307 3 2 4 0 . 0 0 13950003 3.00 1094 14740001 1475U001 1. 1375O010 1. 1095 1474.1001 2075C001 -0 . 9 0 14750010 -1.00 1096 14740001 20750002 -0 .45 1CCCOOO0 -1000.00 1097 1474)001 2075CC03 -0 .45 14750001 -1. 1093 14740001 2075C010 -0 . 1 0 109') 14 7 4 0 0 0 2 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 7 2 1 6 0 . 0 0 1 1 5 9 2 3 7 2 0 0 0 8 1 1 0 1 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 2 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 3 5 4 0 . 0 0 1 1 6 0 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 1 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 2 1 4 7 5 0 0 0 2 1 . 1 1 6 1 2 9 7 2 0 0 0 9 1102 • 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 2 2 C 7 5 0 O O 4 - 0 . 0 1 1 6 ? 20 720CC9 i loo 1 4 7 4 0 O 0 2 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 5 - 1 . 0 0 116 3 2 O 7 2 0 C 0 9 1 1 0 4 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 3 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 7 2 1 6 0 . 0 3 1 1 6 4 2 0 7 2 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 5 1 4 ^ 4 0 0 0 3 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 3 5 4 0 . 0 0 1 1 6 5 2 C 7 2 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 S 14 7 4 0 0 0 7 1 4 7 5 0 0 0 3 1. 1 1 6 6 2 0 7 2 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 7 14 7 4 0 0 0 3 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 6 - 1 . 0 0 1 1 6 7 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 1 1 1 C 3 I 4 7 4 0 0 0 4 1 4 5 5 0 0 0 4 0 . 0 1 1 6 3 2 C 7 3 0 O 0 1 1 1 0 9 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 4 1 4 9 5 0 C 0 7 3 2 4 0 . 0 0 1 1 6 9 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 4 1 4 7 5 0 0 0 4 1 . 11 70 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 2 1111 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 4 2 C 7 5 C 0 0 1 - 1 . 0 0 1 1 7 1 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 2 1 1 1 2 14 7 4 0 9 0 4 7 0 7 5 0 0 0 2 - 0 . 5 0 1 1 7 ? 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 2 1 1 1 3 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 4 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 3 - 0 . 5 0 1 1 7 3 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 3 1 1 1 4 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 4 2 0 7 5 0 0 1 0 - 0 . 0 I 174 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 3 1 1 1 5 1 4 7 4 ) 0 0 5 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 4 0 . 3 1 1 7 5 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 3 1 1 1 5 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 5 1 4 9 5 1 1 0 7 2 7 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 7 6 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 4 1 U 7 1 4 7 4 1 0 0 5 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 3 3 6 0 . 0 0 1 1 7 7 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 4 m a . 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 5 1 4 7 5 0 0 05 1 . 1 1 7 0 7 0 7 3 0 0 0 4 11 19 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 5 2 C 7 5 0 0 0 4 - l . C O 1 1 7 9 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 5 1 1 2 0 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 6 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 4 0 . 0 1 130 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 5 1 1 2 1 1 4 7 4 9 C C 6 1 4 7 5 C 0 0 6 1 . 1 1 8 1 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 5 1122 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 6 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 3 - 1 . 0 0 1 1 3 2 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 6 1 1 2 3 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 7 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 4 0 . 0 1 1 8 3 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 6 1 1 2 ' . 1 4 7 4 0 C 0 7 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 7 4 6 2 5 . 0 0 1 1 8 4 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 6 1 1 2 5 1 4 7 / . 0 0 0 7 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 3 9 2 5 . 0 0 1 1 0 3 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 7 1 1 2 6 1 4 7 4 0 0 3 7 1 4 7 5 0 0 0 7 1 . 1 1 0 6 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 7 1 1 2 7 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 7 2 C 7 5 0 0 0 7 - 1 . 0 0 1 1 8 7- 2 1 7 ) 0 0 0 7 1 1 2 3 1 4 7 4 ) 0 0 8 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 4 0 . 0 1 1 3 1 20 7 3 0 0 0 3 1 1 2 9 1 4 7 4 ) 0 9 1 1 4 7 5 ( 0 0 8 1 . 1 1 3 ) 2 0 ' * 0 0 O 8 1 1 3 0 14 7 4 0 0 0 8 7 C 7 5 0 C C 9 - 1 . 0 0 1 1 9 3 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 3 1 1 3 1 1 4 7 4 ) 0 0 9 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 4 0 . 0 1 1 9 1 2 0 7 3 0 C 0 9 1132 • 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 9 1 4 7 5 0 0 0 9 1 . 1 1 9 ? 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 9 1 1 3 3 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 9 20 7 5 0 0 0 9 - 1 . 0 0 1 1 9 3 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 9 1 1 3 4 1 4 7 4 0 0 1 0 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 4 0 . 0 1 1 9 4 2 C 7 3 0 0 1 0 1 1 3 5 1 4 7 4 0 0 1 0 14 7 5 0 0 1 0 1 . 1 1 9 5 2 0 7 3 O O 1 0 1 136 1 4 7 4 0 0 1 0 2 0 7 5 1 ) 1 1 0 - 1 . 0 0 1) 96 2 0 7 3 0 0 1 0 117 7 2 0 7 7 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 1 ) 7 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 1 11 3 3 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 1 7 0 7 5 0 0 3 1 - 1 . 1 1 9 3 7 0 7 4 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 9 2 O 7 7 0 C O 1 2 C t 5 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 . 0 3 1 1 9 1 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 1 1 1 4 3 2 0 " ' ? J U 0 2 10COOCOO -1 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 1 1141 2 0 7 : 0 0 0 2 2C750OO2 - 1 . 1 2 0 1 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 1 r i 4 ? 2 0 7 2 0 0 9 2 2 0 6 5 C 0 1 2 I O C O . 0 0 1 202 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 1 1 1 4 3 2 0 7 7 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 0 3 7 0 7 4 0 C 0 1 1 1 4 4 2 0 7 7 0 0 1 3 2 C 7 5 C C 0 3 - 1 . 1 2 0 4 2 0 7 4 0 0 9 1 1 1 4 5 2 0 7 2 0 0 ; ) ? 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 . 0 3 1 2 3 5 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 1 1 1 4 6 7 0 7 ? OOO'* ICCCOOOO - looo.oo 1 2 0 6 20 7 4 0 0 0 1 1147 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 4 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 4 - 1 . 1 7 C 7 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 2 1 1 4 3 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 4 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 0 3 ? 0 7 4 0 0 0 2 1 1 4 9 2 0 7 7 1 0 0 5 ICCCOOOO - 1 0 0 0 . 0 3 1 7 0 9 Z 0 7 4 0 C 0 2 1 1 5 0 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 5 2 0 7 5 0 0 9 5 -1. 1 2 1 3 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 2 1 1 5 1 2 0 7 2 C O O 5 2 C 6 5 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 . 0 3 1 7 1 1 2 C 7 4 0 C 0 2 1 1 5 2 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 6 ICCCOOOO - 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 7 1 2 2 0 7 4 )C07 1 1 5 3 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 6 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 6 -1. 1 2 1 3 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 3 1 1 5 4 2 0 7 2 O 0 C 6 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 iceo.oo 1 7 1 4 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 3 1 1 5 5 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 7 ICCCOOOO - 1 5 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 1 5 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 ? 1 1 5 6 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 7 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 7 - 1 . 1 2 1 6 2 3 7 4 0 0 0 4 1 1 5 7 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 7 2 C6 50 3 1 2 1 5 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 1 7 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 4 1 1 5 8 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 8 1COOOOOO - 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 1 3 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 4 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 8 - I . 1 7 1 9 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 4 2 0 5 5 0 0 0 4 0 .0 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 1000.00 1 2 2 0 2 0 7 4 0 0 1 4 3 0 9 5 0 0 0 7 3 2 4 0 . 0 3 ICCCOOOO - 1 0 0 0 . 0 3 1 2 2 1 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 4 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 4 I . 7 C75CCC9 -1. 1277 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 4 3 C 7 5 C 0 0 1 - 1 . 0 0 2 C 6 5 0 0 1 2 1000 .03 1 2 7 3 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 4 3 0 7 5 0 0 3 2 - 0 . 5 0 1 C C 0 0 0 0 3 - 1000.00 1 2 2 4 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 4 3 0 7 5 0 0 0 3 - 0 . 5 0 2C75( 3 1 0 -1. 1 2 7 5 207 4 0 0 0 4 ? 0 7 5 0 0 1 0 - 0 . 0 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 10C0.00 1 2 2 6 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 5 2 0 5 5 0 0 3 1 0.0 1 0 C 0 C 0 0 0 0.0 1 2 2 7 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 5 2 C 9 5 0 0 1 2 0.0 2 0 1 5 0 0 0 1 1. 1 2 2 3 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 5 2 C 5 5 0 3 0 3 3 . 0 0 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 - 0 . 0 1 2 2 9 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 5 2 0 9 5 0 0 04 0 .0 icoooooo 1 5 6 . C O 1 2 3 0 7 0 7 4 0 0 0 5 3 C 5 5 C O 0 7 2 7 0 0 . 0 0 2 C 7 5 C 0 0 2 1. 1 2 3 1 2 0 7 4 0 C 0 5 3 0 9 5 0 0 1 3 3 6 0 . 0 0 2 0 ( 5 0 0 1 2 - 1 5 6 . 0 0 1 2 3 2 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 5 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 5 1. 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 198 .00 1 2 3 3 20 7 4 0 0 0 5 3 C 7 5 C 0 0 4 - I . 0 0 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 3 1. 1 2 3 4 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 6 2 0 9 5 0 9 3 1 0 . 0 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 - 1 5 8 . 0 0 1 2 3 5 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 6 20 5 5 0 0 1 2 0 . 0 ICCOOOOO 0 .0 1 2 3 6 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 6 2 0 9 5 0 0 1 3 3 . 0 0 2O75CO04 1. 1 2 3 7 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 6 2 0 5 5 0 0 0 4 0.0 2 0 6 5 0 0 ! 2 - 0 . 0 123 3 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 6 2Q-iryjQCb 1 . 1 0 1 X 3 0 0 0 2 7 9 . 0 0 123 9 2 0 7 4 0 0 9 6 3 0 7 5 0 0 0 3 - 1 .01 2 C 7 5 0 C O 5 1 . 1 2 4 0 2 0 7 4 3 0 0 7 2 09 500 01 0 . 0 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 - 2 7 9 . 0 0 1 2 4 1 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 7 2 C 5 5 O 0 9 2 0 .0 ICCCOOOO 3 3 0 . 0 0 1 2 4 ? 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 7 2 0 9 5 0 0 0 3 3 . 0 0 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 6 1 . 1 2 4 3 2 0 7 4 0 C 0 7 2 C 5 5 0 0 0 4 0 . 0 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 - 3 3 0 . 0 0 1 2 4 4 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 7 3 C 9 5 0 1 O 7 4 6 2 5 . 0 0 ICCCOOOO 3 0 0 . 0 0 1 7 4 5 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 7 3 C 9 5 O 0 1 3 9 2 5 . 0 0 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 7 1. 1 2 4 6 2 0 7 4 O C 0 7 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 7 1. 2 C 6 5 0 0 1 2 - 3 0 0 . 0 0 1 2 4 7 2 0 7 4 0 C 0 7 7 C 7 5 0 C 0 7 - l .00 ICOOOOOO 0 . 0 1 2 4 3 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 8 2 0 9 5 0 0 0 1 0.0 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 3 1 . 1 2 4 9 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 8 2 C S 5 0 0 1 2 0 . 0 2 ) 6 5 0 0 1 2 - 0 . 0 1 2 5 0 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 8 2 0 4 5 0 1 0 3 3 . 0 3 ICOOOOOO 0.0 1 2 5 1 2 0 7 4 0 0 C 8 2 C 5 5 0 C 0 4 0 .0 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 9 1. 1252 2 0 7 4 0 C 0 8 2 0 7 5 0 0 ) 3 1. 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 -0.0 1 2 5 3 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 3 3 0 7 5 0 C 0 9 - 1 . 0 3 ICCOOOOO 220.00 1 2f 4 2 0 7 4 O C C 9 2 C 9 5 0 0 0 1 0 .0 2 C 7 5 0 0 1 0 1. 1 2 5 5 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 9 7 0 5 50 .002 0 .0 2 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 • - 2 2 0 . 0 0 1 2 5 6 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 9 2 0 9 51-103 3 . 0 0 2 0 9 5 0 0 0 1 0.0 1 2 5 7 2 0 7 4 0 C C 9 2C55O0O4 0 .0 2 0 9 5 0 0 0 2 0 . 0 1 7 5 3 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 9 2 1 7 5 C ' 0 ) 9 1. 2 0 1 5 0 0 0 3 3 . 0 0 12 39 2 0 7 4 0 C C 9 3 C 7 5 0 C O 9 - 1 . 0 0 2 C 9 5 C 0 0 4 0 . 0 1 2 6 0 2 0 7 4 0 0 1 0 2 C 1 5 0 9 U 0.0 3 0 1 5 0 0 0 7 3 2 4 0 . 0 0 1 2 6 1 2 0 7 4 0 0 1 0 2 0 5 5 0 0 0 2 O .Q 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 1 1. 1 2 6 ? 2 0 7 4 0 0 1 0 2 C 1 5 0 0 O J 3.00 3 0 7 5 C 0 0 1 - 0 . 9 0 1 2 6 ? 2 O 7 4 O 0 1 0 20951 0 0 4 % °-° 3 0 7 5 0 0 0 2 - 0 . 4 5 1 2 6 4 2O74O01O 2 0 7 5 0 0 1 0 1. 3 C 7 5 0 0 0 3 - 0 . 4 5 1 2 6 5 2 0 7 4 0 0 1 0 1 C 7 5 C 0 1 0 y - 1 . 0 0 3 0 7 5 0 0 1 0 - 0 . 1 0 1 2 6 6 3 0 7 2 0 0 0 1 ICOOOOOO - 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 3 0 5 5 3 0 0 7 3 1 6 0 . 0 3 1 ? 6 7 3 0 7 2 O C 0 1 3C7 5 C C C ! - I . 3 C 9 5 0 O 1 3 5 4 0 . 0 0 1 2 6 3 3 0 7 2 0 0 1 1 3 0 6 5 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 2 1. 1 2 6 9 3 0 7 2 0 0 0 2 ICCCOOOO 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 3 0 7 5 9 0 0 4 -0.0 1 2 7 0 3 0 7 2 0 0 0 2 3C7 5 0 1 0 2 -1. 3 0 7 5 0 0 0 5 -1.00 1 2 7 1 3 0 7 2 0 0 9 2 7 0 5 5 0 312 1CC0 .03 3 0 5 5 0 0 0 7 2160 .03 1272 3 0 7 2 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 C 3 0 1 0 0 0 . 0 3 3 0 9 5 0 0 1 3 540 .00 1 2 7 3 3 0 7 2 0 0 0 3 3 0 7 5 0 0 0 3 -1. 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 3 1. 1 2 7 4 3 0 7 2 0 0 3 ? 3 0 * 5 0 1 1 2 iceo.oo 3 0 7 5 0 0 0 6 -1.00 1 2 7 5 3 0 7 2 0 0 0 4 ICCCOOOO 1000 .00 2 0 9 5 0 0 0 1 0.0 1 2 7 6 3 0 7 2 0 0 0 4 3 0 7 5 0 0 3 4 -1. 2 0 5 5 0 0 0 2 0.0 1 2 7 7 3 0 7 2 0 C 0 4 3 C 6 5 O 0 1 2 1 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 9 5 0 0 0 3 3.00 1 2 7 B 3 0 7 2 0 0 0 5 ICCOOOOO 1000 .00 12 79 30720C05 3C750005 - I . '•1139 30740003 1280 30720005 3C650O12 1000.03 1343 30740003 1271 3072C006 10000000 -1000.00 1341 30740004 1237 30720CC6 3C75O006 - 1 . 114? 30740004 123} 30720006 30650012 looo.oo ! 343 30740004 1234 30720007 1CCCOOOO -1625.00 1344 30740004 123 5 30720007 3C75OO07 - 1 . 1345 30749004 12 36 ?07r.-0PO7 30650.312 1625.00 1346 30 740C04 12P 7 30723J0S ICCOOOOO -1000.00 1 147 30 740004 123 3 30720008 3C750CC8 - 1 . 1343 30743005 1239 30720008 3C650012 1000.00 1 349 30 741095 1 290 307200C9 ICCCCOOO -1000.00 \?50 30740005 1291 30720009 3C750009 - I . 1351 30 740005 1292 30720009 30650012 1000.00 1352 30 740005 1793 3 072 0 0' 0 10 COO 300 -1000.00 1353 30740005 1 294 30720010 30750010 - 1 . 1354 30740C05 1295 30720010 33650312 10 00.00 1355 10741005 1256 3C7300C1 ICOOOOOO 0.0 1356 3074)036 1297 70720001 30750001 1. 1357 3C749005 1293 20730001 33650312 - 0 . 0 1353 30 74O106 1299 30730002 10000000 160.00 1 359 30740016 1330 3 077 0002 30750002 1. 1 360 30740006 1301 3 373 9002 30550112 -160.00 1361 3 0/400 06 1302 30 73000 3 1CCCOOOO 202.50 1 362 307'.OCC7 1303 3077OOO3 39750003 1. 1363 10 740007 1334 .30733003 30150012 -202.50 1364 30740007 1305 30730004 lOCCOOOO 0.0 1365 30740C07 1306 ?07!'0034 30750004 1. 1366 30749017 1307 30730004 30650012 - 0 . 0 1367 30/4C007 1 303 30730005 ICCOOOOO 2 86.75 I 368 10 740007 1309 30731-005 30750005 1. 1361 30749107 1310 30730005 3 0650012 -286 .75 13 70 30 74 IOCS 1 7 U 31 7 '0006 1OCOOOOO 330.00 1371 30 /40008 1312 307 30006 3 ) 750016 1. 1373 30740003 1313 30730006 3C650O12 -330.00 1373 30 '40CC3 1314 30 7^000 7 1CCC0000 3 00.00" 1374 30 74 1003 1315 3073 )017 30751007 1. 1375 3074 3013 1316 3073O0C7 3C65C012 -300.00 13 76 3074 )009 1317 2077 )008 100COOOO 0.0 1377 30 740009 1313 30730008 3C75CCO0 1. 1373 33740CC9 1 319 30730003 30650012 - 0 . 0 13 79 10 741009 13 20 30730009 10000000 0.0 1330 33/40009 1321 30770CC9 30750009 1. 1381 19 743009 1222 30730009 3 06 50012 - 0 . 0 13 32 39740010 1323 ?97 10010 10001000 220.00 1333 33740010 1324 30730010 3C75001O 1. 1334 19 /40010 1325 30730010 30650012 -220.00 1335 30741111 13 76 30740001 10001000 268.00 1334- 30740010 13 2 7 30'43CC1 30)50001 0.0 133 7 10 741110 1323 30740901 3C950092 0.0 I 333 1J760001 1329 30740001 30350003 3.00 1 331 1O761C00 1330 30740001 30550004 0.0 1390 10760POO 1331 30740011 40550007 3240.00 1391 10 760000 1332 30740C0! 30750001 1. 139? 1076)000 1333 30740002 10CCOCO0 135 .00 1393 10 760000 1334 30740002 40550007 2160.00 13)4 10 76 0000 133 5 30*40002 40950013 540.03 1395 10 760000 1336 30740002 30150002 1. 1396 1076 0 0 90 1337 3074000? lOCCOOOO 205.00 1397 10760000 1333 30740003 40150007 3160.00 1193 10760000 40950013 540.00 1397 1076CC00 1C650012 0.05 3075COO3 1. 1400 10760000 20650112 0.05 lOCCOOOO 198.00 1401 20740000 ICOOOOOO -1. 30<;50111 0.0 1402 21760000 20650012 1. 30 )50002 0.0 1403 30760000 ICCOOOOO - 1 . 30S50003 3.00 1404 30760000 30650012 1. 30150004 0.0 1405 10510001 10650001 -1. 4C550007 3240.00 1416 19550001 1 1650001 1. 3.0 7 50004 1. 1407 1 36 50001 10650032 - 1 . ioooeooo 193.00 I403 13650012 10650012 1. 3*150001 0.0 1409 116 50002 11650113 - 1 . 30550012 0.9 1410 19650C03 1065OCO3 1. 3C15J013 3.00 I ' . l l 11650003 10651014 - 1 . 3C550004 0.0 1412 10650004 10650004 1. 40951007 2700.00 1413 10650004 10650005 -1. 4C550013 360.00 1414 11659005 106 510)5 1. 39750005 1. 1415 106 50015 10650006 - 1 . ICCOOOOO 258.03 1416 I0a50006 1065C006 1. 30150001 0.0 1417 106 50006 11650107 - 1 . 30550002 0.0 1413 10650007 1C650007 1. 309 50003 3.00 1419 11650007 106 50008 -1 . 10550004 0.0 14 20 10650003 1 06500)8 1. 30750006 1. 1421 10.6 50003 106 50C09 -1. ICCOOOOO 1000.00 1422 10650009 10650009 1. ••0500)1 0.0 1423 1065 >097 106 5 )910 -1. 30950002 0.0 1424 10650010 11650110 1. 3C750O03 3.00 1425 106 50010 10650011 - 1 . 39550014 0.0 1426 10650011 10650011 1. 40)50007 4625.00 1427 1365901.1 lCi50012 - 1 . 4C550013 S25.00 14 2 3 " 10640012 10650312 1. 20750007 1. 14 29 1064O012 2C65P012 - 1 . 1CCCOOOO 328.00 1 4 39 10550001 lOCOOOno -0.0067 3C1500J1 0.0 1431 10550001 1J65O031 -1. 3C151 032 0.0 14 32 10550011 10650002 1.0067 3C )50003 3.00 1433 13550002 ICCOOOOO -0.0067 3C55O014 0.0 1434 105501)2 1 J t: 500 02 -1. 3075.J0C3 1. 1435 10* 50092 10650O13 I.C067 lOCCOOOO 448.00 1436 19550013 10000030 -0.0067 30950091 0.0 1437 10550003 1C650003 -1. 3C55O0O2 0.0 1433 10550003 10650004 1.0067 3 C-150093 3.00 1439 10550004 10000000 -0.0067 30950.104 0.0 144 3 10550004 106 5C004 - 1 . 30)50009 1. 1441 10550014 10153005 1.0067 10C01COO 200.00 1442 10550005 1CCCOOOO -0.0067 30150001 0.0 l<-43 10550005 lOt 50005 - 1 . V 1C950092 0.0 1444 11550005 1Q650006 h.0067 30 )50003 3.00 1445 1055JO16 UOOCOOO -0.P067 3055C004 0.0 1446 10550006 10650006 -1. 30750010 1. 1447 105 500C6 l O t50007 1.0067 10000000 - 1 . 1443 10550017 l accoooo -0.0067 10650002 0.05 1449 10550007 10/ 50007 - 1 . 1065C013 0.11 1450 10550007 1065C008 1.0167 1065C004 0.11 1451 105 50008 lOCIf 000 -0.0067 1065O005 0.07 1452 10550008 10650003 - 1 . 10650106 0.05 1451 10550003 1C650009 1.00!>7 10650007 0.07 1454 10550009 10000000 -0.0067 106 50008 0.02 1455 105500C9 1C650C09 - 1 . 10650009 0.04 1456 105500C9 10650010 1.0067 10650010 0.10 145 7 13550010 ICCOOOOO. -0.0067 10650011 0.26 1458 10550010 106 50010 - 1 . pr ri5-» 10550010 10650011 1 .0067 1460 ;-l*b"".50011 ICCCOOOO - 0 . 0067 1461 10350011 10650011 - 1 . 1462 10550011 10650012 1 .0067 1 463 10 55001 2 ICCOOOOO -1 .O8O0 1464 10?50012 10650012 - 1 . 146 5 10.550012 2365.1312 1.0800 1 '.66 10V50OJ1 10001.000 -0.0100 1467 10450001. 10659001 - 1 . 146 3 1045U001 106 50002 1.0100 1469 10450002 1CCC0C00 -0.0100 14 70 10450012 10650C32 - 1 . 147! 10450002 1 Of 50003 1.0100 1472 10'. 50003 1000(000 -0.0100 1473 10450003 13650003 - 1 . 1474 1045)003 106 50 004 1.0100 1475 10450004 10000000 -0.0100 1476 10450C04 1065C004 - 1 . 1477 104 50 004 I Of- 5000 5 1.0100 147'J •13',5CC05 icconooo - 0 . 0 1 0 3 1479 10'. 30005 1 Ct 50005 - 1 . 1430 10430005 IC650P06 1.0100 143! 10450006 ICOOOOOO -0 .0100 1482 10', 50 0 05 106 50 006 - 1 . 1483 10450C06 10650007 1.0100 1434 10450007 10C00000 -0.0100 143 5 10450007 1C65O007 - 1 . 1436 10450007 106 50003 1 .0100 1437 10'. 5000 3 ICOOOOOO -0.0100 14S3 104 5000 8 106 50003 - 1 . 1439 19'.50008 106 50009 1.0103 1490 1 04 5 3009 10000000 -0 .0100 1491 1 0450009 1C650 009 - 1 . 149? 10 450009 10650010 1.0100 ! 493 10 450010 ICCCOOOO -0 .0100 1494 1 04 500 10 10650010 - 1 . 1495 104500!0 10650011 1.0100 1436 104500!1 ICOOOOOO -0 .0100 149 7 10450011 10650011 - 1 . 1498 10450011 10650 312 1.0100 14"9 104 30012 ICCCOOOO •1.1200 1500 10450012 1 1650012 - 1 . 1501 10450012 20650012 1 .1200 1592 10)50001 1065OCO1 - 1 . 150? 10350002 106 5C032 - 1 . 1 50'. 1 03 50003 ISt 50003 - 1 . 1505 10? 50004 13650004 - 1 . 1536 103 50005 10650005 - 1 . 1 507 103 50006 106 50 006 - 1 . 1503 10? 5 )0 )7 10650007 - 1 . 1 509 10350003 10650008 - 1 . 1510 10350009 1C65OC09 - 1 . 1511 10350013 10650010 - 1 . 1512 10)50011 10650011 - 1 . I 5 p 103 50012 '.0650012 - 1 . 1514 102 50001 10650001 1. 1515 102 50002 10650002 1. 1516 19250003 10650003 1. 151 7 102 50004 1C650004 1. 1513 102 50005 13650005 1. 1519 10250006 10650006 1. 1520 1025)007 10650007 I. 152". 102 500)3 10650003 1. 1522 1O25OC09 10650009 1. 1523 10250010 10650010 1. 1521 1025J1U 10650011 1. 1 525 1 )250012 10650012 1. [1526 20550012 20650012 1. 1527 20650012 30650012 - 1 . 1523 20550012 1CCCI0P0 -1.0800 1529 20550012 20650012 - 1 . 1530 20553012 30650012 1.0800 15)1 2)450012 13000000 -1.1200 1532 20450012 20650012 - 1 . 1533 20450012 30650012 1.1200 1534 20350012 20650012 - 1 . 1535 20:53012 20650012 1. 1 536 30r>500l2 ICCOOOOO 1. 1537 30650012 3 )650012 1. 1533 1055001? ICCCOOOO -1.0800 1539 30550012 3065001? - 1 . 1540 3 )450012 1O0OC.O00 -1.1200 1541 33.50012 30(50012 - 1 . 154? 30?50012 30650312 - I . 1543 30250012 306503.12 1. 1544 RH S < 1545 3 1095C007 1546 3 1095C018 1547 BQ'.JNOS 1543 FX 3N11 10 )10007 755.00 1549 rx a ' -PI 10110113 27.00 1 550 Fx MNH 2CS5O007 205.00 155! FX 8N1I 20350003 1400.00 155? FX ' f i l l 20E50007 40.00 155) rx 3111 3095CO07 205.00 1554 FX 3'-ni 30850903 1400.00 1555 FX s v m 30350007 50.00 1556 FX 3 P 1 4C950007 205.00 1557 FX 3-P1 40)500)3 1400.00 1553 FX H i l l 43350007 45.00 1559 L I a - n i 10920007 30.00 1560 L I B f l l 10920013 60.00 1561 F X R*P1 1093)007 20.00 1562 FX 3 P 1 20130007 20.00 1563 FX 3 - P l 3C530C07 5.00 1564 F X S ' l l l 11710001 300.00 1565 Fx 3N11 1171000? 60.00 1 566 FX 3N11 1I71C101 60.00 1567 FX 341! 1171CO04 30.00 1560 FX 3 \ P i 1171CO05 30.00 1569 rx 3111 11710006 0.0 1570 FX 8-PI 11710007 16.00 1571 FX 3 'JH 11710008 0.0 157? FX RNH 11 710009 0.0 1571 FX 3111 11710010 0.0 1 574 FX H ' P l 13730006 45.00 1575 FX ON11 13730010 30.00 1576 FX HN'H 13770002 4.00 1577 FX 3W11 13770303 3.00 1578 FX « N 1 l 14720007 4.00 15 79 FX 3N11 14730002 86 .00 1580 FX BN01 14730003 e7.00 1531 FX 3-111 1 4 73CO05 30.00 1582 FX 3N11 14730006 15.00 153? FX B N U 14730007 4 .00 1584 rx 3N01 14740007 16.00 1585 FX (VOl 20721007 4 .00 1586 FX 3N11 20730002 90.00 1507 FX 3 M i l 20730003 90.00 1588 FX 2O720C05 20.00 1539 FX BNO 1 20730006 60 .00 1590 FX T m 20730007 4 .00 1591 FX 3 - m 20730010 30.00 1592 FX B ' l l l 2074C007 16.00 1593 FX SN11 30720007 4 .00 1594 FX ON 31 30730002 90.00 1595 FX B -O l 3071000) 90 .00 1596 FX 3N31 3072C005 30.00 1597 FX 8 N i l 30 7 3 CO06 60 .00 1598 FX " N i l 3073C007 4 .00 1599 FX R ID 1 30730010 30.00 1600 FX 3N11 3074C00 7 16.00 1601 L I 3N91 10760000 9240.00 1602 L I 3 ' P l 20 760C03 9240.00 1603 L I s - n i 3076COOO 9240.00 1604 UP 3191 10610001 5C000.O0 1605 UP r m i 10550001 5CCCC.00 1606 UP v m 10550002 50000.00 1607 UP 3 P 1 . 1055000 3 5C000.00 16C8 UP 3J01 1055000', 50000.00 1609 UP 3-'l11 105500.15 50000.00 1610 UP 3»P1 10550106 50003.00 1611 UP •m i 10550007 5C000.00 1612 II" IM'U 10550008 50000.00 1613 UP o-o i 10!5CCC9 5C0CC.30 1614 UP 3M01 10550010 500P0.00 1615 UP B N U 10550011 50000.30 1616 UP •3TU 1055C012 50000.00 1617 UP HT11 10450001 8C0C0.O0 1610 U D 3N11 10450002 30000.00 1619 UP i - n i 10450003 30000.00 1620 UP 3N01 10450004 800CO.OO 1621 UP BNO I 10450005 8C0OO.OO 1622 UP 3N01 13450006 8C0CC.O0 1623 . UP 3N11 10451 307. 30000.00 1624 UP 3N1 1 1045CO03 ate co.oo 1625 UP 3 ' O l 10450C09 80000.00 1626 u° B'lOl 10450010 8C0C0.0O 1627 U 3 vni 10450011 80000.00 1628 UP 3N31 13450012 80300.00 1629 FX 3 N H 10350001 0.0 1630 FX 8N11 1035C 03? 0.0 1631 FX 3N11 10350003 60 .00 163? FX 3N11 10350004 50C0.O0 1632 FX ONU 10359005 0 .0 1634 FX 3 N i l 13350C06 o.o 1635 FX B N U 10350007 0 .0 1636 FX •3N11 10350008 0.0 1637 FX 3 -m 10350009 0.0 1638 FX 8N01 10350310 60 .00 1 6 3 9 F X 3 < P l 1 0 3 5 0 0 1 1 0 . 0 1*40 FX • v n i 1 0 3 5 0 0 1 2 0 . 0 1 6 4 1 FX •3 1:3 1 1 0 2 5 0 0 0 1 4 4 5 . 0 0 1 6 4 2 F X 3N">1 1 0 2 5 0 0 0 2 6 4 5 . 0 0 1 6 4 ? FX 3'ID1 1 0 2 5 0 P O 3 1 5 2 0 . 0 0 1 6 4 4 FX 3N31 . 1 0 2 5 0 0 0 4 1 1 4 5 . 0 0 1 6 4 5 FX 3N01 1 0 2 5 0 0 0 5 7 6 7 0 . 0 0 1 6 4 6 FX :) -JO 1 1 0 2 5 0 0 0 6 1 2 3 0 . 0 0 1 6 4 7 F X 3'1'H 1 0 3 5 0 0 0 7 1 3 7 0 . 0 0 1 6 4 5 FX 3-131 1 0 2 5 0 0 3 8 7 7 0 . 0 0 1 6 4 0 FX 3'|-11 1 0 2 5 0 0 0 9 1 2 2 0 . 0 0 16 50 FX 3-n 1 1 0 3 5 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 . 0 0 1 6 5 1 FX 3-ni 1 0 2 5 0 9 1 1 1CB 7 0 . 0 0 1 6 5 2 FX •3-ni 1 0 2 5 0 3 1 2 1 2 7 0 . 0 0 1 6 5 3 U"> 3M01 2 0 5 5 0 0 1 2 2 C 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 6 5 4 u° 3 N U 2 0 4 5 0 0 1 2 1 0 9 0 0 . 0 0 1 6 5 5 FX 3 N 0 1 2 0 3 5 0 0 1 2 5 1 2 0 . 0 0 1 6 5 6 FX •i»ni 2 0 2 5 0 0 1 2 3 9 2 6 5 . 0 0 16 57 U° 3*111 3 0 5 5 0 0 1 2 2 C 0 0 0 . O O 1 6 5 3 UP 3-m 3 0 4 5 0 0 1 2 1 0 C 0 0 . 0 0 1 6 5 9 • FX 3N91 3 0 3 5 0 0 1 2 5 1 2 0 . 0 0 166 0 FX 3N91 3 0 2 5 0 0 1 2 3 9 2 6 5 . 0 0 > U 6 1 FND4 T4 ?ND IF FILE *5?o, - 212 -APPENDIX I I I FILE LISTING OF SOLUTION TO BASE CASE SITUATION IN MPSX FORMAT 347 348 3V9 350 351 352 353 354 353 356 357 358 359 350 341 362 353 364 365 ?66 347 363 3 6 9 3 7 0 OPTIMAL SOLUTION ' • " „ l - x r r . u r m . MPSX B ' L F A S P I MWJ L B V C I 6 CS0LUT10N |oDTT MALI OTIMF • 0 . 4 2 " I I S . 1TP*»T10N NUMB";* • IS8 . . . N A M - . A C T I V I T Y . . . OFF INFO AS 0 FUNCT'ONU 5 6 0 6 4 . 8 8 4 0 0 10000000 ROS T«AIN'"'S BOUND*.. PAGP 10 - 76/22 OSFCTION - NUMBE3 0 1 2 3 . ' 4 5 6 7 4 8 9 10 11 12 13 -XFCUTO*, 1 - 3 0W5 . .,»n«.. 1 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 1 0 9 5 0 0 0 1 1 0 9 5 0 9 0 2 1 0 9 5 0 0 0 3 1095 0 0 0 4 1 0 9 5 0 0 0 5 1 0 9 5 0 0 0 4 1 0 9 5 0 0 0 7 1 0 9 5 0 9 0 3 1 0 9 5 0 0 0 9 1 0 9 5 0 0 1 0 1 0 9 5 0 0 1 1 1 0 9 5 0 0 1 2 MPSX RFLFASF 1 BNP1 »»3I> l c V C l 6 A T 85 PS 85 RS RS BS 8S UL 85 8S BS 3S BS . . A C T I V I T Y . . . 5 6 0 6 4 . 8 8 4 0 0 137 SLACK ACTIVITY 5 6 0 6 4 . H34C.0-0 0 0 0 0 - 137 00000 L I M I T . NON* NTi* NOMF NJVie NUM* Nit* NTI* SKI* ["TIN* N3»l = NOV*. N9N*. NON*. PAGE 11 76/32 .UPPER U N I T . .DUAL ACTIVITY NONE 1 . 0 0 0 0 0 371 1 4 1095001? UL NOME 3 7 2 1 5 10950014 OS HONE 3 7 3 16 10950015 BS . # NONE 3 74 - 17 10950016 BS NON 7 375 18 10950017 BS NONE 376 15 109 50018 BS NON*: 377 20 20950001 BS Mn»,jn 378 21 20950002 BS f # NONE 379 22 20950003 BS 2 7 2 . 0 0 0 0 0 - 2 7 2 . 0 0 0 0 0 NCMC 380 23 2C950004 RS NONE 3.11 24 20950005 P.S p # NONE 332 25 20950006 ns NOME 333 26 2 09 5 000 7 BS 3 3 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 3 - 3 3 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 3 NONE 334 27 20950003 BS NONE 335 28 20950009 BS NONc 336 29 20950010 RS # NOME 337 • 30 20950011 BS NONE 338 * 31 20950012 BS NOME 339 32 20950013 UL m NONE 390 33 2095 0014 BS NONE 391 34 20950015 BS NONE 392 35 20950016 BS NONE 393 36 20950017 BS NONE 394 37 20950013 BS NONE 395 28 20950001 BS NON* 396 39 30950002 BS m NOME 39 7 40 3C950003 BS 2 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 - 2 7 2 . 0 0 0 0 0 NINE 39 3 41 30950004 BS NONE 395 42 30950005 RS NONE 400 43 20950006 RS NON>-401 44 30950007 RS 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 6 6 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 NONE 402 45 3C950003 RS NONE 40 3 46 30950009 RS NONE 404 47 3 0 9 5 0 0 ! 0 ns NOME 405 48 3C95001 '. RS NONE 406 49 30-150012 ns NONE 407 1 EXECUTOR. MPSX RELEASE 1 MOO LEVEL 6 408 0 NUMBF3 • . i w . . AT . . • ACTIVITY. SLACK ACTIVITY . . L O W E R LIMIT. 409 0 50 3C950013 UL NONE 410 51 30950014 BS NONE 411 52 30950015 ns m NONE 412 52 3 09 500!6 BS MOM E 413 54 3 0 9 S 0 0 ! 7 BS NONE 414 55 30950013 es. NONE 415 56 40950001 BS NONE 416 57 40950002 RS m NflNF 417 58 4C950003 BS NONE 413 59 40950004 BS NOME 41 9 60 40950005 BS NON c 420 61 40950006 RS m NI'INE 421 62 40950007 ns 6 5 9 9 . 9 9 9 9 9 - 6 5 5 9 . 9 9 9 9 9 NONE 422 63 4095 0008 BS NONE 423 64 4C950009 ns NONE 424 65 40950010 BS NONE 42 5 66 4C95001 1 RS NONE 426 67 40950012 BS NONE 42 7 68 40950013 UL NONE 428 69 40950014 BS NONE 429 7 0 40950015 BS N0N>-430 71 40950016 BS • NONE 1 0 9 9 9 -1 0 9 9 9 -U P P E R LIMIT. PAGE .OUAL ACTIVITY . 1 2 5 0 0 -431 7 2 4 0 9 5 0 0 1 7 3.5 - . 3 . 3 7 3 4 0 9 5 0 0 1 3 8 5 4 3 3 7 4 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 1 "S 4 3 4 7 5 ! l ° 5 O 1 0 2 ns 4 3 5 7 6 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 3 ns 4 3 6 7 7 1 ' . 9 5 1 1 0 4 ns 4 3 7 7 3 1 1 9 5 0 1 0 5 RS 4 3 8 7 9 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 6 RS 4 3 9 A 8 0 ?. 1 . 9 5 0 1 0 7 U L 4 4 0 8 1 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 8 RS 4 4 1 8 2 1 1 5 5 0 0 0 9 RS 4 4 ? 3 3 1 1 9 5 0 1 ) 1 0 ' RS 4 4 3 8 4 1 1 9 5 0 0 1 1 RS 4 4 4 8 5 1 1 ° 5 0 P ' 2 RS 4 4 5 8 6 1 1 9 5 0 0 1 3 U L 4 ' . 6 8 7 1 1 9 5 0 0 1 4 PS 4 4 7 8 8 1 1 9 5 0 0 1 5 ns 4 4 8 8 9 1 1 9 5 0 0 1 6 PS 4 4 9 9 0 1 1 9 5 0 0 1 7 8 S 4 5 0 9 1 1 1 9 5 0 0 1 8 ns 4 3 1 9 2 1 2 9 5 0 0 0 ! ns 4 5 2 9 3 1 2 9 5 0 0 0 2 ns 4 5 3 9 4 1 2 9 S 0 0 0 3 ns 4 5 4 9 5 1 2 9 5 0 0 0 4 ns 4 5 5 9 6 1 2 9 5 0 0 0 5 ns 4 5 6 9 7 1 2 9 5 0 0 0 6 ns 4 5 7 9 8 1 2 9 5 0 0 0 7 BS 458 99 1 2 9 5 0 0 0 3 RS 4 5 9 100 1 2 9 5 0 0 0 9 BS 4 6 0 1 E X E C U T C 4 6 1 0 N U M B E R . . . c I W . . A T 4 5 2 0 1 0 1 1 2 9 5 0 0 1 C BS 4 6 3 1 0 2 1 2 9 5 0 0 1 1 BS 4 6 4 1 0 3 1 2 9 5 0 0 1 2 BS 4 6 5 1 0 4 1 2 9 5 0 0 1 3 BS 4 6 6 1 0 5 1 2 9 5 0 0 1 4 BS 4 6 7 1 0 6 1 2 9 5 0 0 1 5 BS 4 6 8 1 0 7 1 2 1 5 0 0 1 6 ?S 4 6 9 1 0 3 1 2 9 5 0 0 ! 7 BS 4 7 0 1 0 9 1 2 9 5 0 0 1 8 BS 4 7 1 . 1 1 0 1 3 9 5 0 0 0 1 BS 4 7 ? U l 1 3 9 5 0 0 0 2 RS 4 7 3 A 1 1 2 1 3 9 5 0 0 0 3 U L 4 7 4 1 1 3 1 3 9 5 0 0 0 4 RS 4 7 5 1 1 4 1 3 9 5 0 0 0 5 BS 4 7 6 1 1 5 !. ? 9 5 0 0 0 6 ns 4 7 7 1 1 6 1 3 9 5 0 0 0 7 PS 4 7 8 1 1 7 1 3 9 5 0 0 0 8 BS 4 7 9 1 1 8 ! 7 . 9 5 0 0 0 9 PS 4 3 0 1 1 9 1 3 9 5 0 0 ! 0 RS 4 3 1 1 2 0 1 . 3 9 5 H 0 1 1. RS 4 3 2 1 2 1 1 3 9 5 0 0 1 2 BS 4 3 3 1 2 2 1 3 9 5 0 0 1 3 ns 4 3 4 1 2 ? 1 7 9 5 0 0 1 4 BS 4 8 5 1 2 4 1 3 9 5 0 C 1 5 BS 436 1 2 5 1 3 9 5 0 0 1 6 n s 4 3 7 126 1 3 9 5 0 0 1 7 BS 4 3 8 1 2 7 1 3 9 5 0 0 1 8 BS 4 3 9 1 2 8 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 1 BS 490 1 2 9 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 2 BS MPSX RELEASE 1 MOO LEVEL 6 •ACTIVITY... SLACK ACTIVITY • LOWER HIT-N O M E r j T ip NONE N N M C N9 '-l<-N O M E N O M E M O N E M I N E H O N E N O M E M O M E N O N E N O M E N O N E N I N E N O N E N O M E M O V E N O M E N O M E N O M E N O N E N O N E N O M E N O N E N O N E L I M I T . N O N E N O N E N O N E N I N E N O N E N O N E N O N E N I N E N O N E N O N E N O N E N O N E N O N E N O N E N O M E N O M E N 9 N E N O N E N O N E N O N E N O N -N O N E N O N E N I N E N O N E N O N E N O N E NONE NONE 10999-•UPPER LIMIT. PAGE .DUAL ACTIVITY 49 1 130 1 4 9 5 C 0 0 3 BS 49 2 13) ] '.OS 0004 BS 493 122 1 4 9 5 0 0 U 5 BS 49 4 13 3 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 6 P S 4 9 5 ^ A 134 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 7 U L 496 125 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 3 B S 4 9 7 1 ? 6 1 4 1 5 0 0 0 9 8S 4 9 8 137 1 4 9 5 C 0 ' 0 RS 4 9 9 139 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 1 BS 530 139 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 2 BS 501 1 4 0 1 49500' . 3 U L 5 0 2 141 1 4 1 5 0 9 1 4 OS 503 142 149S0O15 RS 504 143 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 6 BS 505 144 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 7 BS 5 0 6 145 1 4 9 5 0 0 1 8 BS 507 146 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 1 F Q 5 0 8 1 4 7 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 2 ro 5 0 9 148 ! 1 7 5 0 0 0 3 E Q 510 1 4 9 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 4 r-Q 511 1 5 0 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 5 »=0 512 151 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 6 •=0 513 1 ^ X E C U T O 5 1 4 0 N U M R E 9 . . O W . . A T 515 04 152 U 7 5 0 0 O 7 E Q 5 1 6 153 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 8 ro 5 1 7 1 5 4 1 1 7 5 0 0 0 9 F 0 518 155 1 1 7 5 0 0 1 0 £0 5 1 9 156 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 1 r-o 520 157 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 2 E Q 521 158 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 3 E Q 522 159 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 4 C Q 52 3 160 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 5 F Q 524 161 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 6 ro 525 162 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 7 F O 526 163 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 8 F Q 527 164 1 2 7 5 0 0 0 9 E Q 523 165 1 2 7 5 0 0 1 0 F O 529 166 1 3 7 5 0 0 0 1 F 0 530 1 6 7 1 3 7 5 0 0 0 ? F Q 531 168 1 3 7 5 0 0 0 3 E O 532 169 1 3 7 5 0 0 0 4 ro 533 170 1 3 7 5 0 0 0 5 F Q 534 171 1 7 7 5 0 0 0 4 F 0 535 172 13 75 0007 F O 536 173 1 3 7 5 0 0 0 e F Q 537 174 1 3 7 5 0 0 0 9 F Q 538 175 1 3 7 5 C O ! 0 E Q 5 3 9 176 14750O0I E Q 5 4 0 177 1 4 7 5 0 0 0 2 F Q 541 173 1 4 7 5 0 0 0 3 E Q 542 179 1 4 7 5 0 0 0 4 E Q 543 180 1 4 7 5 0 0 0 5 F Q 544 181 1 4 7 5 0 0 0 6 F Q 54 5 132 1 4 7 5 0 0 0 7 F Q 546 1 8 3 1 4 7 5 0 0 0 a F Q 547 184 1 4 7 5 0 0 0 9 H Q 548 185 1 4 7 5 0 0 1 0 E Q 5 4 9 186 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 1 E O 5 5 0 1 8 7 2 0 7 5 0 0 0 2 (=0 :. HPSX RELEASE 1 MOO IEVFL 6 ...ACTIVITY... SLACK ACTIVITY .. N O M E N ' V I -r.'QN c NONE Mf t\j r. N O M E N O N E N O N E N O N C N O N C N O N E N O N F N O N F N O N E N C N E N O N E IER LIMIT. ..UPPER LIMIT. 1 6 8 8 . 7 4 4 6 3 -2 6 3 . 3 0 4 5 0 -3 8 8 . 6 0 2 7 0 -1 6 5 4 . 1 6 0 7 0 -4 4 6 . 0 2 1 3 0 -4 4 8 . 0 0 0 0 0 -PAGS .OUAL ACTIVITY 44 0 448 2 0 0 0 1633 323 4'.B 16 54 485 44 3 101 44 8 4'iB 2 0 0 0 6 3 7 93 , 1 9 4 0 , 4 8 5 , 3 7 3 , 4 4 0 . . 1 0 1 , 44 3 . 44 3 , 200O. 6 3 7 . 9 3 . 1 9 4 0 . 4 8 5 . 3 2 3 . 4 4 3 . 1 0 1 . 4 4 8 . 4 4 8 . 2 0 0 0 3 5 1 . 78 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 9 0 0 -. 0 0 ) 0 0 -74 46 3 -. 7 0 1 8 0 -. 0 3 0 0 0 -. 1 6 0 7 0 -. 6 2 3 0 0 -. 0 0 0 0 0 -. 7 4 5 : 7 -. 0 0 0 3 0 -. 0 0 0 0 0 -. 0 0 0 0 0 -. 0 5 3 0 0 -. 6 0 2 7 0 -. 6 0 >70-. 6 2 0 0 0 -. 2 0 1 8 9 -. 0 0 0 0 0 -. 74 53 7 -. 0 9 0 0 0 -. 0 0 3 0 0 -. 0 0 0 0 0 - • . 0 5 . 3 0 0 -. 6 0 2 7 0 -6 0 2 7 0 -. 6 2 0 0 0 -2 0 1 3 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -7 4 5 3 7 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 3 0 -0 2 0 0 0 -7 0 0 0 0 -1* 7 6 / 3 2 I r H I 551 133 20750003 p 0 55 2 139 20750004 553 190 20750005 c 0 554 191 20750006 •=0 535 102 20750007 8? 556. 193 20 750008 c<3 557 194 20750009 *Q 55 8 195 20750010 55 9 196 3075000 I ' 0 560 157 3075000? ro 561 198 30750003 rQ 562 199 30750004 ro 563 200 30750005 co 564 201 30 750006 F 0 565 202 ?075onn7 35 566 1 PXFCUTOR. MPSX RELEASE 567 0 NUM3?3 AT . . . A C T I V I T Y . . . 558 0 20? 30750003 FO 559 204 3C750009 c 0 570 205 .3075 00'. 0 FO ' 571 206 10650001 UL 572 207 10650002 UL 573 208 10650003 UL 574 209 10650004 UL 575 210 10650005 UL 576 211 10650006 UL 577 21? 10650007 UL 578 213 10650008 UL 579 214 10650009 UL 53 0 215 10650010 UL . 531 216 10650011 UL 53 2 217 10650012 UL 583 213 20650012 UL 534 219 30650012 UL 535 1 HXFCUTOR. MPSX RELEASE 536 OS F C T I ? N 2 - COLUMNS 5 37 - .COL'J'i ' l . 4T . . . A C T I V I T Y . . . 538 0 220 10110005 LL 539 221 10910006 LL 590 332 10910007 FO 7 5 5 . 0 0 0 0 0 591 22 3 10010003 LL 592 224 10910009 LL 593 225 109 I O C 10 LL 59 4 226 10910011 LL 595 227 10910012 LL 5'>6 228 10910013 C Q 2 7 . 0 0 0 0 0 597 229 10910014 LL 59 8 230 10910015 LL 579 231 101)0016 LL 600 232 10910017 LL 631 2 33 1091C018 LL 632 A 234 10940005 LL 603 A 235 1 C<".0006 LL 604 236 10940007 3 5 1 4 3 6 7 9 9 . 5 9 9 9 9 605 A 237 10940003 LL 606 A 238 10940009 LL 607 A 239 10940010 LL 608 A 240 10940011 LL 609 A 241 10940012 LL 610 242 10940013 BS 1 MOO LFVFL 6 SLACK ACTIVITY 150.50000-367.80090-153. 00000-2000.00900-448. 443. 2000. 26U. 64. 134. 193. 146. 253. 09000-00300-00000-00000-30000-80000-00900-299 00-00000-. IN PUT 500 500 70 500 500 500 5C0 500. 110. 500. 500, 500. 500, 500. C O S T . . .00000-. 00000-, 00000-. 00000-. o o o o c -.00000-, 00000-.00000-00000-,00000-,00000-00000-ooooo-0 0 0 0 0 -•LOWER L IMIT . N O N F N O N E N9N = N O N E N O M F H O N 1 ; N O N = N O N ? N O N F . N O N ! : N O N ? N O N C N O N E N O N E , .LOWER LIMIT. ..UPPER LIMIT. PAGE •DUAL ACTIVITY ' 328.00000-44 8". 00000-200.00190-1.00000-1.00000-1.00000-1.00000-1.09900-1.00009-1.00000-1.00900-1.00090-1.00000-1.000 00-1.00000-1.09900-1.09900-PAGE 755 27 00000 00000 PPER LIMIT. •REDUCno COST. NONE 500.00000-Nn-jc 500..70300-755.00000 70. 00000-NON" 500.00000-NON r 500.00000-NON'1 500.OOOOO-NOME 500.00)00-NOMF 500.00000-27.00000 109.99000 NONE 500.00000-HOME 500.00000-NONE 500.00000-500.00000-NONE 500.00000-NONE NOME NONF NON c NONE NON? NON c NON* NONF 15 - 76/32 16 7 6 / 3 2 I I 00 r-l CN I 61 1 A 24 ) 1 0 9 4 0 0 1 4 LL 612 A 244 1 0 9 4 0 0 1 5 LL 613 A ? 'i 5 1094 0 0 1 6 LL 6 1 ' , A 246 1 0 9 4 0 0 1 7 LL 61 5 A. 24 7 1094 0 0 1 8 LL 61 6 A 248 2 0 9 1 0 0 9 1 LL 617 A 249 2 0 9 5 0 0 0 2 I.L 61 3 A 250 2 0 9 5 0 3 0 3 LL • 6 1 ? A 251 2 0 9 5 0 0 0 4 LL 620 252 2 0 9 5 0 0 0 5 LL 621 253 2 0 9 5 0 0 0 6 LL 622 254 2 0 9 5 0 0 0 7 FO 623 255 2 0 9 5 0 9 9 8 LL 624 256 2 0 9 5 0 0 0 9 LL 625 2 5 7 2 0 9 5 0 0 1 0 LL 626 258 2 0 9 5 0 0 1 1 LL 627 2 5 9 2 0 9 5 0 0 1 2 LL 628 260 2 0 9 5 0 0 1 3 LL 629 261 2 0 9 5 0 0 1 4 LL 6 3 0 262 20950<H5 LL 631 263 2 0 9 5 0 0 1 6 LL 632 A 264 2 0 3 5 0 0 0 1 LL 63? A 265 2 0 3 5 0 0 0 2 LL 634 266 2 0 9 5 0 0 0 3 FO 63 5 A 2 6 7 2 0 3 5 0 0 0 4 LL 636 263 20S50OO5 LL 537 1 EXECUTOR. 6 3 8 0 N U ^ q . - . 9 L U"N. AT . 6 3 9 0 2 6 9 2 0 9 5 0 0 0 6 LL 64 0 2 7 0 2 C 3 5 0 0 0 7 PQ 641 271 2 0 9 5 0 0 0 8 LL 642 272 2 C 3 5 0 0 0 9 LL 6 4 3 2 73 2 0 3 5 0 0 1 0 LL 644 274 2 0 3 5 0 0 1 1 LL 6V5 275 2 C35 001 2 LL 646 2 7 6 203 5001. ? LL 6 4 7 2 7 7 2 0 1 5 0 0 1 4 LL 6 4 8 278 2 C 9 5 0 0 1 5 LL 6 4 9 279 2 03 5 0 0 1 6 LL 65 0 A Jf lC 3 0 9 5 0 0 0 1 LL 651 A 231 3 0 9 5 0 0 0 2 LL 652 A 2 32 3 0 9 5 0 0 0 3 LL 653 A 233 3 0 9 5 0 0 0 4 LL 654 ?34 30950.105 LL 655 235 3 0 9 5 0 0 0 6 LL 656 236 3 0 9 5 0 0 0 7 FO 6 5 7 287 •"0950008 LL 658 288 3 0 9 5 0 0 0 9 LL 6 5 9 2 8 9 3 0 9 5 0 0 1 0 LL 660 2 9 0 30=>50011 LL 661 2 9 1 2 0 9 5 0 0 1 2 LL 662 292 3 0 9 5 0 0 1 3 LL 6 6 3 293 3 0 9 5 0 0 1 4 LL 664 294 3 0 9 5 0 0 1 5 LL 665 2 9 5 3 0 9 5 0 0 1 6 LL 666 A 2 9 6 3 0 3 5 0 0 0 1 LL 66 7 A 297 3 0 8 5 0 0 0 2 LL 6 6 8 2 9 8 3 C S 5 0 0 0 3 CQ 6 6 9 A 2 9 9 3 0 8 5 0 0 0 4 L L 6 7 0 3 0 0 3 0 8 5 0 0 0 5 L L 205 1 4 0 0 ooooo 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 2 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -9 3 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -ooooo-0 9 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -ooooo-0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -ooooo M PS X R E L E A S E . A C T I V I T Y . . . . 4 0 2 0 5 1 4 0 0 OOOOO 0 0 0 0 0 ooooo 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 , 61 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -3 ) 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -ooooo-0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -. 6 2 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -2 0 5 . 6 2 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -1 MOO I.EVfcL 6 •INPUT C O S T . . 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -6 ? . 9 9 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - • 5 0 0 . 0 9 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -1 4 0 0 OOOOO OOOOO •LOWER L I M I T . 4 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 5 1 4 0 0 OOOOO OOOOO rjnr-j cr M O T NUN 1 1 NOME Mp«jr" NONE NOM r NONE NONF NONE ' NONE 2 0 5 . 0 0 0 0 0 MON c NONE NONE NOM* N O N c NON* NONE NONE N9"E NON 1 5 NONE 1 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 . NONE NONE • UPPEP L P ' I T . NOME 40.OOOOO NOME NONE NOME N O T NON* NONE NON* NONE NOME NONE NON*1 NONE NON* NONE NOM^ 2 0 5 . 0 0 0 0 0 NONE NONE NONE NONE NOME NON* NONE NONE N O H c NONE NONE 1 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 NONE NONE 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 1 0 5 . 5 0 0 . SCO. 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 3 -9 5 0 0 9 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 9 0 0 -0 9 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 1 9 9 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -1 . 2 V 0 0 0 -500 .REOUCE 500 125 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 0 0 0 0 0 -PAGE COST. . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 5 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -. 0 0 0 0 0 -. 0 9 0 0 0 -. 0 0 0 9 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -. 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -. 0 0 0 0 0 -•ooooo-5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 1 2 3 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -7 6 0 0 0 -0100 3 -0 .1109-0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 9 0 0 -0 0 0 0 9 -0 3 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -1 . 2 4 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -1 7 - 7 6 / 3 2 I CTl r H ( N I 6 7 1 3 0 ! 3 O B 5 0 0 0 6 L L 6 7 2 2 0 2 " 0 3 5 0 0 0 7 r 0 6 7 3 3 0 ? 3 0;1 5 0 0 0 3 L L 6 7 - , 3 0 4 3 0 3 5 0 0 0 9 L L 6 7 5 3 0 5 3 0 3 5 0 9 1 0 L L 6 7 6 ? 0 6 2 0 3 5 9 0 1 1 L L 6 7 7 3 0 7 3 0 8 5 0 0 1 2 L L 6 7 8 3 0 0 3 0 3 5 0 0 1 3 L L 6 7 9 3 0 9 3 0 8 5 0 0 1 4 L L 6 3 0 3 1 0 3 C 3 5 0 0 1 5 L L 6 8 1 3 1 1 2 0 3 5 0 0 1 6 L L 6 8 2 A 3 1 2 4 0 9 5 0 0 0 1 L L 6 3 3 A 3 1 3 4 C 9 5 0 0 0 2 L L 6 3 4 A 3 1 4 4 0 9 5 0 0 0 ? L L 6 8 5 A 3 1 5 4 C 9 5 0 0 U 4 L L 6 3 6 3 1 6 4 0 9 5 0 0 0 5 L L 6 3 7 3 1 7 4 0 9 5 0 0 0 6 L L 6 3 8 3 1 8 4 0 9 5 0 0 0 7 r 0 6 3 9 3 1 9 4 0 9 5 0 0 0 8 L L 6 9 0 1 E X E C U T OR 6 9 1 0 N U M R E R . C O L U M N . A T 6 9 2 0 3 2 0 4 0 9 5 0 0 0 9 L L 6 9 3 3 2 ! 4 0 9 5 0 1 1 1 0 L L 6 9 4 ~> 22 4 0 9 5 0 0 1 1 L L 6 9 5 3 2 3 4 0 9 5 0 0 1 2 L L 6 9 5 3 2 4 4 0 9 5 0 0 1 3 L L 6 9 7 3 2 5 4 0 9 5 0 0 1 4 L L 6 9 0 3 2 6 4 0 9 5 0 0 ! 5 L L 6 9 9 3 ? 7 4 C 9 5 0 0 1 6 L L 7 0 0 A 3 2 8 4 0 3 5 0 0 0 1 L L 7 0 1 A 3 2 9 4 C 3 5 0 O 0 2 L L 7 0 2 •>?o 4 0 3 5 0 0 0 3 FO 7 0 3 A 3 3 1 4 0 3 5 0 0 0 4 L L 7 0 4 3 3 ? 4 C " 5 0 0 0 5 L L 7 0 5 3 3 3 4 0 3 5 0 0 0 6 L L 7 0 6 3 3 4 4 C 3 5 0 0 0 7 FQ 7 0 7 3 3 5 4 C 3 5 0 0 0 R L L 7 0 3 3 3 6 4 0 8 5 0 0 0 9 L L 7 0 9 3 3 7 4 C 0 5 0 0 1 0 L L 7 1 0 7 3 R • 4 0 8 5 0 0 1 1 L L 7 1 1 3 3 9 4 0 3 5 0 0 ! 2 L L 7 1 2 3 4 0 4 0 3 5 0 0 ! 3 L L 7 1 3 ? 4 1 4 0 0 5 0 0 1 4 L L 7 1 4 3 4 ? 4 C 3 5 0 0 1 5 L L 7 1 5 3 4 ? 4 0 3 5 0 0 1 6 L L 7 1 6 3 4 4 1 0 9 2 0 0 0 5 L L 7 1 7 3 4 5 1 0 5 7 0 0 0 6 L L ' 7 1 8 • • 4 6 ! 0 9 7 O O 0 7 L L 7 1 9 3 4 7 1 0 9 7 0 0 0 8 L L 7 7 0 3 4 0 1 0 0 7 0 0 0 9 L L 7 2 1 3 4 9 1 0 9 2 0 0 1 0 L L 7 2 2 3 5 C 1 C 9 2 0 0 1 1 L L 7 2 3 3 5 1 1 0 9 7 0 0 1 2 L L 7 2 4 3 5 2 1 0 9 2 0 0 1 3 BS 7 2 5 3 5 3 1 0 9 7 0 0 1 4 L L 7 2 6 3 5 4 1 0 9 2 0 0 1 5 L L 7 2 7 3 5 5 1 C 9 2 0 0 1 6 L L 728 3 5 6 1 0 9 2 0 0 1 7 L L 729 3 5 7 1 0 9 2 0 0 1 3 L L 730 3 5 8 2 0 9 2 0 0 0 5 L L 50 205 00000 5 0 0 . 7 3 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 , 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 , 5 0 0 , 5 0 0 , 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -0 . 1 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 3 ( 1 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 9 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -ooooo-0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -50 ooooo MPSX RELEASF 1 •ACTIVITY... 1400 45 30 63 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -6 3 . 1 2 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -M G D L " V " L 6 I N P U T C O S T . . 5 0 0 . O O O C O -5 0 0 . 0 9 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -00000 ooooo ooooo 40000 5 0 0 5 0 0 7 5 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 7 5 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 1 1 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 500. 500. 500. 500. . 6 2 0 0 0 -. 0 0 0 0 0 -. 0 0 0 0 0 -. 1 2 0 0 0 -. 0 0 0 0 0 -. 0 9 0 0 0 -. 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -, 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -00000-00000-00000 205.00000 •LOWER LIMIT. 1400 30 60 ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo N O N -50.OOOOO N O M E N O N E N O M E N O N E N O N E N O N E N O N E N O N E N O N E NO'.jc N O M E N O N E N Q N C N O N E 205.00000 N O N E •UPPER L I M I T . N O N E N O N C N O N E N N N E N O N E N O N R N O N E N O N E N H N C N O N E 1400.00000 M P M E N O N E N O M E 45.00000 N O M E N O N E N O M E N O N E N O M E N O N E N O N E N O N E N O N E N O N -N O M E N O N E N O N E N O N E . N O M E N O M E N O N E N O M E N O N E N O M E N O N E N O N E NONE NONE 5 0 0 . 1 4 7 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . U 9 0 0 0 -7 6 1 0 0 -• 3 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 3 0 -0 1 0 0 0 -0 0 3 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 1 2 6 . 5 0 0 . • R E D U C E 9 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 3 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -2 4 0 0 0 -0 3 0 0 0 -PAGE C 3 S T . 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 1 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 3 -0 0 1 0 0 -0 9 9 0 0 -0 0 9 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -1 . 2 4 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 1 5 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 1 5 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 0 0 . .00900-, 0 0 3 0 0 -2 4 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 3 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -c o o o o -0 3 9 0 3 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 9 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 9 0 0 9 -0 9 0 9 1 -0 9 9 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 9 0 0 0 -0 0 J 9 0 -C O O O O -0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 1 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -1000.00000-18 76/32 o CN CN 731 339 2 0 9 2 0 0 0 6 LL 73? 3 6 0 2 0 9 2 0 0 0 7 LL 733 3 6J. 2 0 9 2 0 0 0 8 LL 734 362 2 0 0 2 0 3 0 9 LL 7 3 5 363 2 C 9 2 0 0 1 0 LL 73 6 ? 6 4 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 1 LL 73 7 365 2 0 9 2 0 0 ! 2 LL 738 3 6 6 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 3 BS 739 3 6 7 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 4 LL 74 0 368 2 C 9 2 0 0 1 5 LL 741 3 6 " 2 0 0 2 9 0 1 6 LL 742 3 7 0 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 7 LL 743 I "XECUTOR 74 4 0 .C3LU"N. AT 74 5 0 371 2 0 9 2 0 0 1 8 LL 74 6 "•72 300 2000 5 LL 74 7 373 3 0 9 2 0 0 0 6 LL 74 8 374 3 0 9 2 0 0 0 7 LL 7 4 9 3 75 3 0 9 3 0 0 0 8 LL 7 5 0 376 3 0 9 2 0 0 0 9 LL 751 3 7 7 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 0 LL 7 5 2 373 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 1 LL 753 3 7 9 3092OO12 LL 754 2 3 0 3 0 9 2 0 0 ! 3 BS 7 5 5 381 3 0 9 2 9 0 1 4 LL 756 3 " 2 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 5 LL 757 39? 7 09 2 0 0 ! 6 LL 7 3 8 384 3 C 9 2 0 O ! 7 LL 7 5 9 385 3 0 9 2 0 0 1 8 LL 76 0 A 386 1 0 9 3 0 0 0 5 LL 761 A 3 8 7 1 0 9 3 0 0 0 6 LL 762 ? S 8 1 0 9 3 0 0 0 7 FO 763 A 339 1 0 9 3 0 0 0 8 LL 764 A 3 9 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 9 LL 765 A ? 9 1 1 0 9 ? 0 0 1 0 LL 766 A 392 1 0 9 3 0 0 1 1 LL 7 6 7 A 393 1 0 9 3 9 0 1 2 LL 76 8 394 1 0 9 3 0 0 1 3 LL 7 5 9 A 395 1 C 9 3 0 0 1 4 LL 7 7 0 A ? 9 6 1 0 9 3 0 0 1 5 LL 771 A 3 9 7 1 0 9 3 0 0 1 6 LL 772 A 3 9 3 2 C 9 3 0 0 0 5 LL 773 A 399 2 0 9 3 0 0 0 6 LL 774 4 0 0 2C930O07 FQ 775 A 4 0 ! 2 0 9 3 0 0 0 3 LL 776 A 402 2 0 9 3 0 0 0 9 LL 7 7 7 A 4 0 3 2 0 9 3 0 0 1 0 LL 778 A 494 2 0 9 3 0 9 1 1 LL 7 7 9 A 4 0 5 2 C 9 3 0 0 1 2 LL 7 8 0 4 0 6 2 0 9 3 0 0 1 3 LL 731 A 4 0 7 2 0 9 3 0 0 1 4 LL 732 A 4 0 8 2 C 9 3 0 0 1 5 LL 73? A 4 0 9 2 0 9 3 0 0 1 6 LL 734 A 4 1 0 3 0 9 3 0 0 0 5 LL 73 5 A 4 1 1 3 0 9 3 0 0 0 6 LL 7 9 6 412 3 0 9 3 0 0 0 7 e 0 7 3 7 A 4 1 3 3 0 9 3 0 0 0 8 LL 788 A 4 1 4 3 0 9 3 0 0 0 9 LL 7 8 9 A 4 1 5 3 0 9 3 0 0 1 0 LL 7 9 0 A 4 1 6 3 0 9 3 0 0 1 1 LL . 2 0 0 0 0 MPSX REL? • A C T I V I T Y . . 4 5 2 0 20 2 0 0 0 0 OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - N ^ M E 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -7 r>. 0 0 0 0 0 - N P N E 1 5 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 3 0 9 0 - . " J O N = 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 9 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - .TIM* ! 0 0 0 . 0 0 9 9 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NONF 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 9 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NONF 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 9 0 0 0 - NONE 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 C 9 0 -1 2 5 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NONE 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NONE 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NOME 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 9 0 0 0 - N O N * 1 0 0 3 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NOME 1 0 0 0 . 0 9 0 0 0 -1 Mno L E V L 6 0 • • IN PUT r i ! t „ . . LOWER L I M I T . . . U P P E R L I M I T . • RFOUCEO C I S T . 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NOME 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 9 0 0 0 - N O N = 1 0 C 0 . 0 0 9 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NONE 1 o o o . o o o o o -75 . 0 0 3 0 0 - N O N E 1 5 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NOME 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NOME 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NnriE 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - MtlN* 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NONE 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -1 3 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NONE 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - N N M E 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - N O N R 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NON* 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NONE 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -5 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NONF 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -• NOME • NOME v. 6 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 20 OOOOO 2 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 • NONE • MCN* • N O N P • N O M * • N O N c NONE 2 1 9 . 9 9 0 0 0 -• NOME NONE NDU-• NONE * N P N E m 6 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 2o! OOOOO 2 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 • NOME • N C N * • NONF • NOIIF • NONE N O N c 2 5 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -• NON c NONE • NOME • NOME • N U N " 7 5 . 0 0 0 0 0 OOOOO 5 . 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NOME NON* NONE m NONE 19 - 76/32 H CM CM 7 U i 4 1 7 3 C 9 3 0 0 1 2 LL 7 9 3 4 ! 3 3 C 9 3 0 O 1 3 LL 79? ". 4 1 9 ? 9 9 : - 9 0 1 4 LL 79 4 A 4 2 0 3 0 9 3 0 0 1 5 LL 753 A 421 3 0 9 3 0 9 1 6 LL 79-> .1 - X E C U T O r > r 0 \'(J • I I L U M M . AT 79 8 0 * 422 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 1 LL 79 9 a 42? 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 5 LL 3 3 0 J 424 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 6 LL 3 ) 1 4 2 5 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 7 BS 3 3 ? a •'-2 6 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 8 LL 333 427 1 1 9 5 0 0 0 9 LL 3 )4 I. 42 8 1 1 9 5 0 0 1 0 LL 30 5 4 2 9 1 1 9 5 0 0 1 1 LL 3 )4 <i"0 1 1 9 S 0 0 1 2 LL 3 17 431 1 1 9 5 0 0 1 3 BS 30 3 432 1 1 " 5 CO 14 LL 3 0 9 4 ? ? 1 1 9 5 0 0 1 5 LL 81 0 434 119 5 0 0 1 6 LL 31 1 A 4 3 5 1 1 9 5 0 0 1 7 LL 312 A 4 3 6 1 1 9 5 0 0 1 3 LL 31 3 A 43 7 1 2 9 5 0 9 0 2 LL 314 4? 3 1 2 9 5 0 9 0 5 LL 815 4 4 3 9 1 2 9 5 0 0 0 6 LL 316 S 4 4 0 1 2 9 5 0 0 0 7 LL 317 A 4 4 1 1 2 9 5 0 0 9 3 LL 3 1 1 A u \ y 1 2 9 5 0 0 0 9 LL 31° 443 1 2 9 5 0 0 1 0 LL " 2 0 444 1 2 9 5 0 0 1 1 LL 3 ? ' . * 44 5 1 ? 9 5 0 0 l 2 LL 32? 4 4 6 ! 2 9 5 0 0 1 3 LL 32 3 5 4 4 7 1 2 9 5 0 0 1 4 L L 3 ? 4 A ' -4 3 1 2 9 5 C 0 1 5 LL 3 2 - ; * 4 4 9 129 3 0 0 1 6 LL 5? 6 45 0 1 2 9 = 0 " ! 7 LL 32 ? A 45 1 1295001.8 LL 3 7 8 . 452 1 3 9 5 0 0 0 3 BS 32 9 ft •'-53 1 3 9 5 Q C 0 5 LL 3<9 t 4 5 4 1 3 9 5 0 0 0 6 LL 3 3'. » 455 1 3 1 5 0 0 0 7 LL 332 A 4 56 1 1 9 5 1 0 0 8 LL 533 A 4 5 7 1 3 9 5 0 0 0 9 LL 334 A •4 53 1 3 5 5 0 9 1 0 LL 33 5 4 •4 59 1 7 9 5 0 0 !1 LL 63 5 i 4 6 0 1 3 9 5 0 0 1 2 LL 33 ? 461 1 3 9 5 0 0 1 3 LL = 3 ? A 4 ' , ? 1 ? 9 5 0 0 ! 4 LL 339 A 4 6 * 1 3 9 5 0 0 1 5 LL -!4 0 464 1 3 9 5 0 0 1 6 LL 3 4 ! « 465 1 3 9 5 0 0 1 7 LL 34 ? 3 ' -66 ! 7 9 5 0 0 1 3 LL 34? 4 6 7 1 4 S 5 0 P 0 4 LL 344 A 4 6 3 1 4 9 5 3 0 0 5 L L 3 45 A 4 6 9 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 6 LL = 46 4 7 3 149 5 0 0 0 7 BS 34 7 471 1 -4950008 L L 343 A 4 7 2 1 4 9 5 0 0 0 9 LL 3 4 9 1 c X FCUT OR 3 3 0 0 NU.VIEO . C O L U M N . AT MPSX - > C L E A S C . A C T I V I T Y . . . . 1 MOO LEVF L • INPUT C O S T . . •LOWER L I M I T . . . U P P E R 1 4 8 3 4 0 0 9 0 4 0 0 1 2 6 3 1 4 8 3 4 0 0 OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO 0 0 0 0 1 MPSX R C L E A S E . . A C T I V I T Y . . . . 1 MOD . INPUT L E V E L C O S T . . NONE NONE NONE NONE N n N E L I M I T . NONE NONE NONE NOME NOME N O N r N O N c NONE NOME HOME NON E N O N r NONE NONE NONE NONE NOME NONE NONE NONE NOME NONE NOME NOME N INE NONE NONE NOME NOME NONE NOME N O N E NOME NONE NONE NONE ' NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NOME NONE NONE HONE NOME N O N c NCNE NONE NONE NONE .LOWER L I M I T . . . U P P E R L I M I T . 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- R E D U C E O C O S T . PACE 7 6 / 3 2 1 0 9 9 9 -1 0 9 9 9 -. R E D U C E D PAGE C O S T . 21 7 6 / 3 2 ZE/9Z ZZ -OOOOO'ZSSI -ooooo v s s t - Z 9 * S Z * 8 6 8 I -OOOOO'ZSSI - C 0 0 8 E * * I S I -OEfcEB -5*E . - o o o o o ' z s s i " i S O O UairiQaa* 30Vd -CZ86Z " U 9 I - Z E S S Z M I E -OOCOO'0002 -00C00*8** - 0 0 0 0 0 * 8 * * -OOOOO * 8 * * - C B I Z 0 * 9 * * -OZ091 •'-991 -CZZ09'88E -os*.-oa*fi9; -E5**Z-8891 -OOOOO -OOOOO -oocoo -OOOOO -0ZG/6 -0E6E6 -OZLCt -05561 -ZC5SZ OOOOO' OOOOO' -OOOOO' OOOOO' 08TZO ' CZC9I' 0ZZ09' 0 5*08 ' E9**Z ' "ZSST • z s s i •oooz •2551 •£SSI •S*£ • I 191 • U i l • H E •0081 021 0001 061 £52 95*1 £81 £EI OZ*t 3NGM aNGN aNON aNON aNON iNUN 3UGN • n - . i i a i o d r r aNGN ..NGN 2.NUN aNON a'NUN zJNGN a NGN "-INUN aNON aNUN aNON a NON aNON aNON aNON aNON al.CN a NON aNON aiNON al.ON aNON aNON SNOr* 2 NUN aNON aNON aNON aNON aNG.N aiJON 0 0 0 0 0 * 9 1 OOOOO'OE OOOOO'OE OOOOO '09 00000*09 OOOOO *00E ai\'GN i N O N aNON aNON a NON a N u N aNON aNON aNON •IIWII baMOV OOOOO ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo 91 0E oe 09 09 OOE - 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 1 - 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 1 -OOOOO *000 I -0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 1 -00000*0001 -00000*000 1 -00000*0001 " i S G j l f i a M ' 9 l j / \ a l ClOrt 1 -OOOOO'GOOI -0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 1 -ooooo -ooooo' -00000' -OOOOO' -OOOOO' -OOOOO' -OOOOO' -OOOOO' -OOOOO' -OOOOO" -ooooo ' -ooooo* -0 0000' -ooooo--ooooo• -OOOOO" -ooooo --ooooo* -ooooo• -ooooo-COOT coot 0001 o o o i 0001 0001 ooo I 0001 OOOI 000 1 002 8** BZE 0001 852 E6I 861 502 '.a I 892 • 31 6000Z/Z! 0E5 0 16 * 31 BOOOZZZI 6Z5 6 (. t • 11 Z.0OOZZZI b2S b( 6 11 9000Z /2I l e i /C6 11 50002/21 425 9T6 • 11 *000cZ2I 5 25 SCO 11 tOOCZ/21 *15 0 ',06 •• ' A X 1 A 1 1 3 V ** i » *l..-.niC 3* arc .III. 0 • Ct >V31ao XSdW *bOl(ljaX = 1 Zt6 11 ZOOCZZcI cZS I CO 11 l o c o ; / : i 2Z5 Cl t S« 0100*/ I I IZS if.O SB 6000*/. iI a z s t< e S8 60C0*Z 1 T 615 Ztb' OOOOO * 9 I Sa z o o u * z ; T 8 I 5 9f.o SB •ycuo^i ri / t5 5( D ooooo *0E sa S0C0*Z11 915 *( b ooooo *0E Sfi ••0007/ i 1 5 la tt'j 00003 •09 SB EOCO*.'.ii Vi 5 ZCb ooooo *09 S8 2000-7/ 1 I £ 15 I t-fc ooooo *00E Sa l u o c * / n 215 01 c 11 01 OOE/ 1 1 I 1 5 (. f ,i 11 o o u o t z i i 0 1b b b b 11 8 000 ii \ I 5 05 Z.i.0 Sa /OOOEi1 I t o e 5J.b 11 901,0c/ i I / 0 5 51 b n SOOOEZ I 1 90a * r ii 11 *C00i.Z i [ 505 ci 8 11 i c o n ; / ; ; *(.b I 1 b 11 ZOOOE/1 1 £05 1 i b 11 IGOOEiil 205 Ci b sa 0I0C2Zii 105 hi S n 60C0ZZ.I1 00 i 8/b n B o o o z z n 6a* L i e n ZOLOZZ1T bG* 5 Z b n 9CC0 2Z 1 i Zt,v 5/b n 50002/TI 96* * / c n *OO0ZZ II 56* E /B n £ 0 0 0 2 / I i *6* 2/ e n cOUOZZII /6* l/S n "COCO 2/ i i 26* O/b 03 o i o o 1/ ',1 CO* 6'. 8 Oa 6000U1I 06* v 8 58 Oa BCOOU i I Gb* Z56 ooooo 9T Ca z o o o u i i 66* 9 9b Oa 9000 iZ • I /H-. 558 OOOOO" OE C/a SCoO U 11 '/t* *5H ooooo• 0£ O J *oooui i 5 b* E5i ooooo• 09 Cd EOCCIZII •;b* Z9E ooooo" 09 Oa 200U l i n c b V I'/b ooooo • OOE 63 1000IZ i l 2 6 * 0'r3 11 810056*, I IB* V 65E 11 Z. IuOSfa*T Ob* V 858 11 910096-iI 6/* V Z53 11 11.0', I.', 1 '•: I '/ V '):.;: TI *l<J0 5t,* I ZZ* S58 ooooo* 00*06 SO E 100'JoV I v z * *5b 11 Z 10056*1 5ZV y £'. h' 11 IUiOa'b-,1 •)/*- V Ci b' 11 010056*1 £ i * V 0 158 ro CN CN "1! 912 91 3 914 915 916 917 915 915 9^ 9 •)3 1 o > 4 925 926 93 7 97 9 929 53 0 95! 932 93 3 93 4 933 9-6 91 7 9 SS 97.0 9.0 941 9 4 2 9'.3 9 t 4 94 5 94 6 9 i 7 9,3 94 9 95 3 95 1 95 2 95 3 9 i 4 95 5 959 95 0 55! 95 2 96 3 954 96 5 95 6 96 7 953 959 970 5 3 ! !2 72 0010 LL 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -52? 12730O01 LL 19 73 0002 LL 514 .'. ^  73 0003 LL 52 5 '27"0004 LL 536 13730005 LL 537 12730005 L L 533 13730907 LL 53 9 12730008 LL 540 12730009 LL 54! '12730010 LL 542 !3740001 8S 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 54? 12740902 BS 6 0 .coooo 54 4 !2740003 8 S 6 0 .OOOOO 545 12740004 8 5 3 0 .00000 546 12740005 3 0 .coooo 547 13 74 0006 RS 54 3 12740007 n s 1 6 .COOOO 549 12740008 BS 550 12740005 SS 551 12 740010 RS 55? 1 3720001 LL 1000 . 0 0 0 0 0 -553 13720002 L L , 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -554 13 720003 LL 1000 0 0 0 0 0 -555 13720004 LL 1000 0 0 0 0 0 -•"•5'- t ~ 720005 LL 1000 0 0 0 0 0 -c 5 7 13720006 LL 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -55? 13 720907 LL 1000. 0 0 0 0 0 -55 9 1"72O0OS LL 1000. 0 0 0 0 0 -560 13 72 0009 LL 1000. 0 0 0 0 0 -1 1 ) 7210!0 L L _ 1000. 0 0 0 0 0 -56 3 13 730001 LL 563 13 73 0 002 L L r- '14 1 •> 770003 LL 545 13730004 LL 566 13730005 LL ^ 6 7 1 -. 7T0006 *Q 4 5 . OOOOO 2 9 7 . 0 0 0 0 0 8 I 3 720007 LL 569 13 730908 LL 579 13 730009 LL 371 1 3 7 3001 0 *Q 3 0 . OOOOO 2 4 0 . OOOOO 5 72 13 770001 LL 5 73 13770002 * 0 4 . OOOOO 5 74 13770003 5 0 3 . OOOOO 0 'HI'':"-0 576 577 = 78 575 580 531 5 3? 53? 534 535 586 537 5 3 3 . E O L U ' l M . 13770004 13770005 1377C006 l1770007 13 770003 13770005 13770010 ! 3740001 13 740002 13 740003 13740004 13740005 13740006 17740007 -XECUTOR, OOOOO OOOOO 00000 OOOOO &T L L L L L L LL LL LL L L RS RS BS RS RS as BS MPSX R E L E A S E I MOO L E V E L 6 • A C T I V I T Y INPUT C O S T . . ••LOWER L I M I T . . . U P P E R NONF NON* 'NON* N n N * NONE NON* NONE NON* NCN* NONE NCN* NONE NONE NON* NONE NONE NON* NONE NONF NONE NONE NONE NON* NONE NONF MON c NON* NONE NONF NON* NONE NONE NON* NONE NONE NONE 4 5 . 0 0 0 0 0 NOME NON* NOM* 3 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 NONE 4.OOOOO 3 . 0 0 0 0 0 300.OOOOO 146.COOOO 1 4 7 . 0 0 0 0 0 30.OOOOO 60.OOOOO 1 5 . 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 . COOOO LIMIT. Nn.NE NON* NON* NCN* NON* NONE NONF NONE N P N * NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE 1 6 8 8 . 329. 4 4 8 . 1 6 5 4 . 4 8 5 . 4 4 8 . 1 0 1 . 4 4 8 . 4 4 3 . 2 0 0 0 . 74463-20180-00000-16070-62000-00000-74537-00000-00000-00000-1 3 6 2 . 1 9 0 6 . 5 9 . 1 5 1 4 . 1 6 7 1 . 1 5 5 2 . 1 8 9 3 . 1 5 5 2 . 1 5 5 2 . 6 3 7 . 9 3 . 1 9 4 0 . 4 8 5 . ? 2 8 . 146. 101. 4 4 8 . 4 4 3 . 1 5 2 0 . 6 3 7 . 9 3 . 1 9 4 0 . • REDUCED 4 9 5 . 3 2 8 . 4 4 8 . 1 0 1 . 4 4 3 . 4 4 8 . 2 0 0 0 . 94200-39730-3/730-38000-79320-00000-25462-00000-00000-05300-602 70-60270-62000-20130-00000 74537-00000-00000-00000-05300-60270-60270-PAGE COST. 62000-20180-00000-74537-00000-00000-00000-2 3 - 7 6 / 3 2 5 / 1 5 8 5 1 3 7 4 0 0 0 3 35 m '111 5 90 13 7 4 0 9 9 9 3 5 w 9 13 5 0 1 13 7 4 0 0 1 0 8S 9 / 4 q 0 "> 1 4 7 2 0 0 0 1 LL 3 ' 5 5 9 ? 1 4 7 2 0 9 0 2 LL # 9 7 6 354 ! 4 72 0 9 0 3 L L 9 I 7 5 9 5 14 7 2 0 0 0 4 LL m 97R 5 5 6 1 4 7 2 0 0 0 5 LL 9 79 5 9 7 1 4 7 2 0 0 0 6 L L 99 9 59 9 1 4 7 2 0 0 0 7 FO 4 .OOOOO 9n 5 9 9 1 4 7 2 0 0 0 8 LL 93? 6 9 9 1 4 7 2 0 9 0 9 L L 9 5 ^ •A- 6 0 1 1 4 7 2 0 0 1 0 LL 9 5 4 602 ! ^ 7 3 0 0 0 1 LL 9 9 5 .60 3 1 4 7 2 0 0 0 2 FQ e6.00000 936 6 0 4 1 4 7 3 0 0 0 3 FO 87.OOOOO 9 3 7 6 05 1 4 7 3 0 0 0 4 LL 953 .6.96 1.4 77 0 90 5 FQ 3 0 . O O O O O 9 3 9 6 0 7 14 73 0 9 0 6 5 0 1 5 . O O O O O 9 10 6 0 5 1 4 7 3 0 0 0 7 FO 4.COOOO oil 6 0 9 14 73 0 0 0 3 LL 9 5 ? 6 10 1 '• 73 0 0 0 9 LL ° 9 1 6 1 1 1 4 7 3 0 0 1 0 LL 9 ) 4 6 1 2 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 1 35 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 9 1 5 6 1 3 14 7 4 0 0 0 2 RS 6 0 . C O O O O = 1 5 6 1 4 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 3 95 6 0 . O O O O O 9 ) 7 6 1 6 14 7 4 0 9 0 4 8S 3 0 . O O O O O 9 ) 3 616 14 7 4 0 0 0 5 9 ? 3 0 . O O O O O 9 ) 9 4 1 7 14 7 4 0 0 0 6 RS 19 30 51 -3 1 4 7 4 0 0 0 7 * 0 1 6 . O O O O O 1931 61 9 1 4 7 4 0 9 0 9 9S 10 9? 5 2 0 14 7 4 0 0 0 9 R5 19 1 3 6 2 1 1 4 7 4 0 0 1 0 BS 1 0 ) 4 5 ^ ? 3 0 7 2 0 0 9 1 LL 1 . 9 ) 5 5 2 3 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 2 L L 1 9 j 6 6 Z 4 20 72 0 0 0 3 LL 1 0 ) 7 635 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 4 LL I . 1 J 1 1 3 X F C U T 0 ° . MPSX D.FLFA ! 9 ) 9 0 = . 5 - 1 . 9 - 1 . ST . . . A C T I V I T Y . . . 1 91 9 0 626 2 0 7 2 0 9 0 3 LL 1 0 1 1 6 2 7 2 C 7 2 O 0 0 6 95 ! 3 1 2 .6 2°. 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 7 FO 4 . 0 0 0 0 0 1013 6 23 2 0 7 2 0 0 0 3 LL 1 0 1 4 62 9 20 72 0 0 3 9 LL . 1 01 5 4 AH 2 0 7 2 0 0 1 0 LL 1016 532 2 0 7 3 C 0 0 1 LL 101 7 63 3 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 2 FO 9 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 101 3 6 34 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 3 FO 9 0 . O O O O O 1 9 1 9 6 9 5 2 0 7 - 0 0 0 4 LL 103 9 636 2 0 7 7 . 0 0 0 5 R 0 3 0 . O O O O O 132 I 63 7 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 6 FQ 6 0 . O O O O O 1 02 2 63 9 2 0 7 3 0 0 0 7 • = 0 4.OOOOO 102 3 63 9 2C77O0O8 L L 1 0 ? 4 64 0 20 73 0 0 0 9 L L 102 5 6 4 ! 2 0 7 3 0 0 1 0 FO 3 0 . O O O O O 1026 642 2 C 7 4 0 C 0 1 RS 3 0 0 . O O O O O 1 0 9 ? 6 4 3 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 2 RS 6 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 9 644 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 3 PS 6 0 . O O O O O 1 0 3 9 6 4 5 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 4 BS ? 0 . O O O O O 1 0 3 0 6 4 6 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 5 RS 3 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 . 1000. 1000. 1000. 1000. 1000, 1 3 0 0 , 1 0 0 0 . 1 0 0 0 . 1 0 0 0 . 00000-00000-00000-00000-00000-00000-00000-00000-00000-00000-1 1 6 . 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 1 . 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 7 . 0 0 0 0 0 2 9 7 . 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 6 . O O O O O 1 0 0 0 , 1 0 0 0 . 1 0 0 0 . 1 0 0 0 . M O O ,!N"UT 1 0 0 0 . 1 0 0 0 . 1 5 0 0 . 1 0 0 0 . 1 0 0 0 . 1 0 0 0 . 00000-00000-00000-00000-L B V O L 6 C O S T . . 00000-00000-00000-00000-00000-00000-1 5 6 . O O O O O 1 9 8 . 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 9 . 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 8 6 8 7 3 0 1 5 4 1 6 OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO .LOWFR L I M I T . OOOOO 9 0 9 0 3 0 6 0 4 3 0 OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO N O N F N O N F N O N * N O N * N O N F N ^ N * N O N * N O N F N O N F . 4 . 0 0 0 0 0 N O N F N O N = N O N * H C N * 8 6 . 0 0 0 0 0 8 7 . 0 0 0 0 0 N O N F 3 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 . 0 0 0 0 0 4 . 0 0 0 0 0 N O N F N O N * N O N F N O N F N O N * N O N F N O N F N O N F N O N * 1 6 . 0 0 0 0 0 N O N F N O N F N O N " N O N F N O N F N O N F N O N * P*R L I M I T . N O N F N O N F 4 . 0 0 0 0 0 N O N F N O N * N O N F N O N * 9 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 N O N * 3 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 4 . 0 0 0 0 0 N O N F N O N * 3 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 N O N F N O N F N O N * N O N F N O N F 1 ? 6 2 . 1 9 0 6 . 5 5 . 1 5 1 4 . 1 6 7 1 . 1 5 5 2 . 2 4 9 8 . 1 5 5 2 . 1 5 5 2 . 6 3 7 . 1 3 3 . 1 5 5 3 . 4 8 5 . 1 0 5 . 1 4 6 . 4 5 0 . 4 4 8 . 4 4 8 . 2 0 0 0 . 9 4 2 0 0 -3 9 7 3 0 -3 9 7 . 1 0 -3 3 0 0 9 -7 9 8 2 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -2 5 4 6 2 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 5 3 0 0 -3 9 7 3 0 6 0 7 7 0 -6 3 0 0 0 -7 9 3 2 0 OOOOO 25463 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 -2 0 3 . 4 9 0 7 5 -1 6 4 8 . 9 3 0 0 0 -1 9 2 1 . 3 0 0 0 0 -' 1 8 0 9 . 5 0 0 0 0 -1 6 3 2 . 2 0 1 0 0 -P S G E • P.rDUCEO C O S T . 1 8 4 7 . 0 0 0 0 0 -3 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -1 5 5 2 . 0 0 0 0 0 -1 5 5 2 . 0 0 0 0 0 -3 5 1 . 2 3 3 . 2 0 5 . 3 6 7 . 4 0 5 . 1 3 4 0 . 6 0 0 . 4 4 8 . 4 4 8 . 1 5 6 0 . 0 2 0 0 0 -3 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 -0 0 3 0 0 00000-00000-00000-2 4 - 7 6 / 3 2 LD CM CN 1031 6 4 7 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 6 L L . NONE 1 6 7 2 . 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 3 7 6 4 8 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 7 FO 16.OOOOO 16 .00000 16.OOOOO 1 1 5 . 6 2 5 0 0 -1 0 3 3 6 4 9 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 3 3S NONE 1 0 1 ' . 6 5 0 2 0 7 4 0 0 0 9 BS NONE 103 5 651 7 0 7 4 0 0 1 0 LL . HCINE 1 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 -1034 6 5 7 3 0 7 7 0 0 0 1 LL • 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NONE 1 7 3 2 . 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 1 7 6 5 3 7 0 7 2 0 0 0 2 LL 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - N ONE 1 9 3 5 . 2 0 0 0 0 -1038 654 3 0 7 2 0 0 0 3 LL • 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NONE 1 8 6 5 . 2 0 0 0 0 -19.19 655 2O770OO4 LL 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NONE 1 8 0 2 . 0 0 0 0 0 -10-'. 0 656 3 0 7 3 0 0 0 5 L L 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NOME 1 8 5 3 . 8 0 9 0 0 -1041 6 5 7 3 0 7 2 0 0 0 6 LL 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NOME 1 7 4 2 . 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 4 7 6 5 8 3 1 7 2 0 0 9 7 - FO 4 .ooooo 1 6 2 5 . 0 0 0 0 0 - 4 OOOOO 4 . 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 5 0 . 0 0 9 0 0 -1 0 . 3 659 3C7?00O3 ' LL 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NOME 1 6 7 2 . 0 0 0 0 0 -104 4 6 6 0 3 0 7 2 0 0 0 9 LL 1 0 0 0 . 0 9 0 0 0 - NONE 1 5 5 2 . 0 0 9 0 0 -1 0 4 5 6 4 ! 3 0 7 7 0 0 ! 0 LL 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 - NOME 1 .700. COOOO-1 0 . 6 663 3 0 7 3 0 0 0 1 LL NONE 2 6 3 . 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 4 7 6 6 ' 3 0 7 3 0 0 0 2 FO 9 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 90 OOOOO 9 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 7 5 5 . 7 0 0 0 0 10 4 3 66 4 3 0 7 2 0 0 0 3 FO 9 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 . 5 0 0 0 0 90 OOOOO 9 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 0 . 7 0 0 0 0 1049 665 30 7 1 0 0 0 4 LL . NONE 1 9 8 . 0 0 0 0 0 -10 4 0 666 3 0 7 3 0 0 0 5 FQ 30.OOOOO 2.36. 7 5 0 0 0 30 OOOOO 3 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 47 7 . 3 0 0 0 0 1051 66 7 3 0 7 3 0 0 0 6 FO 60. OOOOO 3 3 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 60 OOOOO 6 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 402.OOOOO 105 7 668 7 0 7 2 0 0 0 7 EQ 4.OOOOO 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 4 OOOOO 4 . 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 105? 6 6 9 3 0 7 7 0 0 0 0 LL NOME 3 2 8 . 0 0 0 0 0 -105 4 6 7 0 3 0 7 3 0 0 0 9 LL NONE 4 4 8 . 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 3 5 671 ? 0 7 ? 0 9 1 0 c 0 3 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 30 OOOOO 3 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 105 6 6 7 ? 3 0 7 4 0 0 0 ! BS 300.OOOOO 2 6 9 . 0 0 0 0 0 NOME 1057 673 2074 0002 RS 60.COOOO 1 3 5 . 0 0 0 0 0 NONE 105 3 674 3 0 7 4 0 0 0 3 BS 6 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 ' 2 0 5 . 0 0 0 0 0 NONE 1C5 9 675 3 0 7 4 0 0 0 4 BS 30.COOOO. 1 9 8 . 0 0 0 0 0 NONE 1060 6 7 6 7 0 7 4 0 0 0 5 BS 3 0 . OOOOO 1 9 3 . 0 0 0 0 0 NOME 1 0 5 1 1 EXE CUT-JR. MPSX & r L E A S E 1 MOO L r V - L 6 PI 104 7 0 MIIM3FO . C t . ' l - ' N . AT . . . A C T I V I T Y . . . . •INPUT C O ^ T . . ••LOWER L I M I T . . . U P P E R L I M I T . .REDUCE"! COST. 104 3 0 6 7 7 3 0 7 4 0 0 0 6 BS 7 5 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 NOME 1 0 5 4 6 7 3 3 C 7 ' . C 0 0 7 FO 1 6 . OOOOO 1 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 16 OOOOO 1 6 . 0 0 0 0 0 8 7 9 . 7 5 0 0 0 104 5 6 7 9 7 0 7 4 0 0 0 8 BS 3 2 8 . 0 0 0 9 0 NOME 100 6 4 8 0 3 0 7 4 0 0 0 9 BS 4 4 8 . 0 0 0 0 0 NOME 1057 631 3074 0 0 1 0 RS . 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 NOME I 9sr. 6P2 1 9 7 6 0 0 0 0 LL 9240.OOOOO 1 . 0 0 0 0 0 - 9 2 4 0 . OOOOO NONE 1 . 9 . 3 0 0 0 -106 9 607 ? o r ' - o o o o LL 9 2 4 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 1 . 0 0 0 0 0 - 9 2 4 0 OOOOO N O N c 2 . 0 0 0 0 0 -1070 634 207.40000 LL 9740.OOOOO l . o o o o o - 9 2 4 0 . OOOOO NONE 2 . 00000 -1071 6 35 1 0 6 1 0 0 0 1 UL 50000.OOOOO 50000.OOOOO 1.00000 10 7? 6 8 6 1 0 6 5 0 0 0 1 ' BS 46 335.OOOOO NOME 1 0 7 ? 63 7 1 0 4 5 0 9 0 2 BS 4 0 5 1 4 . 9 7 3 0 0 NONE 1074 6 S3 ! 0 6 5 0 0 0 3 BS 3 6 9 8 1 . 1 5 6 0 0 NONE 1075 65 9 1 0 6 5 0 0 0 4 RS 3 9 5 6 5 . J 5 6 0 0 NOME 1076 6 9 0 104 5 0 0 0 5 R-. 2 6 9 5 7 . 3 0 6 0 0 NOME 1 0 7 7 691 1 0 6 5 0 0 0 6 . RS 2 4 9 7 1 . 4 0 6 0 0 NONE 1 0 7 3 693 1 0 6 5 0 0 0 7 RS 2 7 2 5 4 . 3 0 6 0 0 NONE 1 0 7 9 6 9 3 1 0 6 5 0 0 0 3 BS 3 8 1 6 5 . 1 0 6 0 0 NOME 1 0 3 0 694 1 0 6 5 0 0 0 9 DS 4 6 6 4 5 . 3 0 6 0 0 NOME 1031 . 6 9 5 1 0 6 5 9 0 1 0 PS 5 2 9 1 R . 1 8 4 0 0 NOME 1 0 1 ? 696 1 0 6 5 0 0 ! 1 3S 3 9 0 1 1 . 7 8 4 0 0 NOME 1 0 3 3 6 9 7 1 0 6 4 0 0 1 2 BS 2 7 2 7 9 . 7 8 4 0 0 NOME 1034 6 9 3 1055Q001 LL . . 0 0 6 7 0 - 5 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 1 3 4 0 -1 0 3 5 6 9 9 1 0 5 5 0 0 0 2 LL . 0 0 6 7 0 - 5 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 1 3 4 0 -1 0 J 6 700 1 0 5 5 9 0 0 3 LL . 0 0 6 7 0 - 5 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 1 3 4 0 -103 7 701 1 0 5 5 0 0 0 4 LL • • 0 0 6 7 C - 50000.OOOOO . 0 1 3 4 0 -103.8 707 1 0 5 5 0 0 0 5 LL . 0 0 6 7 0 - 5 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 1 3 4 0 -1 0 3 9 703 1 0 5 5 0 0 0 6 LL • • 0 0 6 7 C - 50000.OOOOO . 0 1 3 4 0 -1 0 9 0 704 1 0 5 5 0 0 0 7 LL • . 0 0 6 7 0 - 5 0 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 1 3 4 0 -25 - 76/32 CN CN 10)1 10"?. 10)? 1004 1 0 ) 5 10)6 10)7 1 0 ) 9 1019 1100 1101 113? 1 103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1 108 1139 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1113 1119 1130 1121 1132 1123 112 4 1125 1126 1127 112 3 1 129 1139 I 13!-1132 1133 1134 113 5 1136 1 137 1130 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 END OF F I L F 705 706 707 703 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 72 4 725 726 72 7 0 NUMnco 0 723 72" 730 731 732 733 7?4 735 7?6 737 738 739 740 74 1 742 7^ 2 744 745 746 747 74 8 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 1 OFXIT -10550003 10550009 105500)0 105 5 01)1 1 19550017 104-;000l 1045000? 10450003 10450034 10450005 10450006 10450007 10450008 10450009 10450010 104500U 10450012 10350001 10750002 10350003 10750004 10350005 10150006 • E OL0"1. 10350007 1035D003 103 5 0 009 11350010 10350011 10350012 10250001 10250002 10750003 10250004 10750005 10250006 10250907 10250908 10250009 1C250O1 0 1.07 5 00' 1 10253012 20650012 70 5500!2 20450O12 203 50012 207500!2 30650012 3B550O12 30450012 30350012 30250012 FX TI MF -LL u I L LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL FQ EQ FO ro FQ FQ CUTOR. « T . FO FQ c 0 CO C Q C Q FQ FO FQ F Q FQ FQ FQ FQ FO FQ FQ E 0 85 LL LL FQ EQ PS LL LL C Q EQ ECUTOR. 73 60 5 0 0 0 .006 7 0-.00670-.00670-.00670-1.03000-.01000-.0'000-.01000-.oiooo-.0100 0-.01000-.01000-.01000-.01000-.01000-.01000-1 . 1 2 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 ooooo 445. 645. 1520. 1145. 7670. 1220. 1370. 770. 1220. 1!120. 10870. 1270. 33565. 5120. 39265. 29813. 5 1 2 0 . 3 9 2 6 5 . MPSX OOOOO ooooo coooo ooooo ooooo 01000 ooooo ooooo 03000 ooooo ooooo 00030. 38400 00030 ooooo 88400 OOOOO 0 0 0 3 0 R E L E A S E 08000-12000-0 0 0 0 0 ooooo-1 2 0 0 0 -6 0 5 0 0 0 MPSX F E L E 4 S E 1 MOO LEVEL 6 • A C T I V I T Y . . . . . . I N P U T C O S T . . 60. OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO ..LOWER L I M I T . 445, 64 5. 1520, 1145. 7670, 1220. 1370. 770. 1220. 11120. 10870. 1270. OOOOO ooooo 03000 ooooo ooooo' ooooo 00010 ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo 1 MOO LEVEL 6 5 1 2 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 3 9 2 6 5 . 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 2 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 3 9 2 6 5 . 0 0 0 0 0 50900. 50000. 509 90. 50000. 50 090. 30000. 30000. 30190. 80000. 30100. 80000. 80000. 3001)0. 80000. 80000. 80000. 80000. OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO ooooo ooooo ooooo onono 00090 00.900 ooooo ooooo ooooo 001)00 ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo 6 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 •UPPER L I M I T . 60.00000 44 5 645 1520 1145 7.470 1220 • 137C 770 1220 11120 10870, 1 270, 20000, 10000. 5120. 39265. 2 0 0 0 0 . 1 0 0 0 0 . 5 1 2 0 . 3 9 2 6 5 . 03000 OOOOO • ooooo ,ooooo ,ooooo , 0001)0 00090 ,00000 09000 ooooo 00003 ooooo N9NE ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo NONE 0 0 0 0 0 ooooo ooooo ooooo • 01 34 3-.01 140-.01140-. 013-40-1.14300-.02001-.07000-.02000-.02000-.02000-.02000-.02100-.02000-.02000-.02300-.02000-1.24000-1.00300 1.00000 1.00000 1.00100 1.00100 1.00000 PAGE . R E D U C C P CIST. 1.00000 1.00100 1.00090 1 .ooooo 1.00100 1.00101 1.00030-1. 00000-1.00000-1.00000-1.C0300-1.0UJ30-1.03001-1. 00909-1.00000-1.00000-1. 0O030-1.00000-1.16003-1. 24900-1.00000 1.ooooo-.03000-. 12000-1.00000 1 . 0 0 0 0 0 -PAGE 2 6 - 7 6 / 3 2 2 7 - 7 6 / 3 2 S S I G - 227 -APPENDIX IV THE STRUCTURE OF BEEF MODEL IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF YEAR 1 o i Go Yr. 1: Cash Control Yr. 1: Spring Cattle Control Yr. 1: Winter Cattle Control j Xear 1: Winter Kutrlent Coatrol Year 2: Nutrient Supply Crop Year 1 Year 1: Nutrient Supply Last Crop Year OBJECTIVE FUNCTION o o •-a . U l a »-* • H OO ACTIVITIES >• U l 1 - r -t--°. Opening Stock LAST WINTER to J3. - H IO Feed Transfer LAST WINTER Own Range M a u 'x> *Ti - t-< * • -°. - r - Own Crop Land a •<a 4> t-cn r o 1 • r-» -P, Cn Leased Bange CD L ^ l - M M ° . • H» CA Leased Crop Land w r-vr+ M ° . M Cn Crop Purchases Year 1 w «-*+ CD O, • H * H* CO Crop Sales Year 1 H ° l rO H» l — 1 O H i r o u ° + r o H * r o M Winter TOTAL FEED SUPPLIES CO + * r -r o r o ~°+ r o r o Spring TOTAL FEED SUPPLIES o Co + v r-* eo LO K F + r o CJ Sunnier TOTAL FEED SUPPLIES • r-* r o r o ** Fall s •n OO M tO O r - 1 00 r-« KJ o O K* 1 r o Cn Opening livestock 5 a TO •< so tt •n c - f-* r o Purchases Cs to t is-fO CO rO • o M + • H* t o ««J Sales > i l-O Co o »- + CO K> CO j r-* r- 1 r J i co > r o CO Closing Livestock - 8ZZ -- 229 -APPENDIX V CALF AND FEEDER CATTLE PRICES, 1967 TO 1976 Calves _$./lQQ_lh 0 . 5 S O 1973 1974 J . ''• i. steer calves, Edmonton Sales, constant d o l l a r s 1971; Heifer Calves Source: Canada Department of Agriculture. IV) LO O Feeder Cattle Greater than 700 l b s . .. .?/2Q0--4A , Feeder Cattle, Edmonton Sales; constant d o l l a r s 1971/ — r e a l function of observed Source: Canada Department of Agriculture prices 1, 2 and 3 estimated equations 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0094100/manifest

Comment

Related Items