Beef Magazine is part of the Informa Markets Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

What’s better? Grazing stockpiled winter pasture or bale grazing in a drylot?

What’s better? Grazing stockpiled winter pasture or bale grazing in a drylot?

Is utilizing stockpiled perennial forages in a grazing system beneficial, versus harvesting and taking bales back to the cows to feed them? There are costs in both systems; there’s the cost of harvesting and transportation for bales, versus the cost of supplementation when cattle graze stockpiled forage later in winter.

To find out, Bart Lardner, Western Beef Development Center, University of Saskatchewan, compared the two systems—grazing stockpiled pastures versus bale feeding similar quality forage in a drylot.

“We stockpiled a mixed perennial forage (80% meadow bromegrass, 20% alfalfa), windrowed so we could measure dry matter intake. The other system was harvesting the forage and putting it into round bales—feeding in a pen. We monitored variables, such as change in body weight, change in fat reserves, calving season data, to see if there was any effect on reproductive efficiency,” says Lardner.

Lardner and his team of researchers also monitored forage biomass and quality in the three-year study, looking at legume versus grass component, soil nutrient profile, and economics.

catte nutrition gallery

70+ photos showcasing all types of cattle nutrition
Readers share their favorite photos of cattle grazing or steers bellied up to the feedbunk. See reader favorite nutrition photos here.

 

“Overall, we found forage quality very similar between the two systems. The protein level was between 8% and 9%, the energy level was 56% to 58% TDN. This was more than enough to meet the energy requirements of a gestating beef cow. We found no shift in percent legume and grass whether we grazed it out in the field or harvested it over the three-year period as a round bale,” he says.

“Utilization of available feed was a bit different (putting the cow in front of the feed versus putting the feed in front of the cow). We found greater utilization in the drylot system because feed was in a round bale feeder, versus out in a windrow. The negative effect in the field was due to snow accumulation, making some of the feed less accessible,” explains Lardner.

“In other work, we find that nutrients from urine and feces, and nutrients from the residual feed, is beneficial to the subsequent crop the next growing season,” Lardner also explains. This is where you want those nutrients (in the field) rather than in a drylot where you have to haul the manure out to the fields. Having cows spread manure themselves is a huge benefit that can be difficult to measure.

“We’ve found that grazing— utilizing stockpiled perennial forages —or any type of wintering system that has them out in the field captures more of the urine, nitrogen, etc. to boost future productivity of that field,” Lardner says. This reduces need for commercial fertilizer, and saves the cost of loading and hauling manure.

In the two systems, cows performed similarly. “Though we had to step in with extra supplement in the grazing paddocks, savings in manure hauling made up for the extra cost. Over the three years, we saw a 15% to 20% lower cost in grazing stockpiled perennial forage in fields, compared to feeding the same quality hay in the drylot,” he says.

“We monitored quality of forage from the start of grazing to when we had to end it because of weather. There was a drop in protein and energy in the field, whereas hay quality was static.  Pasture forage started at 8% or 9% protein and dropped to about 6%. We had to supplement cows in colder weather—partly because of increased demands due to cold weather and wind chill and partly because of lower protein content of feed by then, but we were well into December or early January,” says Lardner.

“If a person can get 60 to 90 days of grazing (or longer) on stockpiled perennial forage, this is a big factor in reducing costs. If you stockpile it and can’t get at it because of deep early snow, you can come back to it in the spring,” he says.

Heather Smith Thomas is a rancher and freelance writer based in Salmon, Idaho.

You might also like:

Young ranchers, listen up: 8 tips from an old-timer on how to succeed in ranching

13 utility tractors that will boost efficiency in 2016

Burke Teichert: How to cull the right cow without keeping records

3 weaning methods compared; Which one rises to the top?

6 tips for proper electric fence grounding

9 things to include in your ag lease (that you better have in writing!)

Top 10 issues facing beef producers

Cull early and often to keep your cowherd productive

Cull early and often to keep your cowherd productive

Culling cows and bulls eliminates undesirable animals from the herd and makes room for more productive animals to be added into a beef program. The best time of year to cull depends on the local environment and climate that a ranch is located in. Most cow-calf ranches operate on a spring calving program, selling their calf crop each fall. Culling open cows in the fall is a popular method, but cows can also be evaluated during the spring as well.

Jason Faubion, assistant director of the Ranch Management Program at Texas Christian University in Fort Worth, Texas, recommends culling early and often to keep the ranch operating as efficiently as possible. Cows only earn a profit – and therefore their keep – if they produce a calf each spring.

“Whether cows are culled at branding or at weaning, the decision to cull should be made prior to any other management practice,” says Faubion. “Never vaccinate, deworm, or otherwise treat a cow before deciding to remove her from the herd.”

Following this practice serves a twofold purpose: first, it saves the rancher money; second, drug withdrawal periods apply to cull cows being sold for slaughter.

“Always keep records of such treatments,” Faubion says.

Instead of – or in addition to – traditional fall culling, ranchers can evaluate cows during the spring branding season, then sort off dry cows or cows that appear unable to raise a healthy calf. This conserves grass and other resources for more productive cows.

Most ranchers cull cows that come in dry or open in the fall. Old cows, broken-mouthed cows or cows with bad udders are also usually culled. The standard procedure involves running the whole cowherd through a chute and hiring a vet to check for pregnancy via palpation or ultrasound.

Old-time managers, like the late Britt Lay of the Whitehorse Ranch in eastern Oregon, visually assessed the cow herd to determine pregnancy. All cows that appeared “snake-bellied” were culled, saving the company the per-head chute fee charged by a vet to preg check. Any open cows that were missed were caught and culled in the spring when they didn't produce a calf.

“Regardless of the method used, sort off the open cows and strongly consider culling them,” says Faubion. “If an open cow is allowed to roll to another breeding season herd, be sure to identify her.”

Cull cows are commonly sold as hamburger meat. This product typically generates the lowest price at the local sale yard, but there are opportunities for producers to add value to this product. Some packers may be willing to pay more for cull animals they can purchase in larger lots, or possibly offer to help with the trucking for full loads. Grouping cows by age, frame size and flesh can help bring a higher price as well.

“Year-branded cows have even commanded added value in past years as a means of age and source verification,” says Faubion.

Bulls are usually tested prior to the onset of the breeding season, and those found to be unsatisfactory are culled. In the Great Basin of the western U.S., the breeding season typically runs June-August. Faubion recommends a thorough breeding soundness exam (BSE), which includes a semen evaluation, testing for any reproductive diseases and an examination of the physical structures of the bull.

seedstock 100

BEEF Seedstock 100 List
Looking for a new seedstock provider? Use our UPDATED Seedstock 100 listing to find the largest bull sellers in the U.S. Browse the list here.

 

“If a bull falls short in any of these areas, it should most likely be culled,” says Faubion.

Bulls can be culled around age five, when they still have useful, productive breeding years ahead of them, in order to command a higher price from a smaller cow-calf producer. This also ensures that the bulls won't grow too large to service heifers, which are smaller-framed than full-grown cows. Waiting to sell the bull until he is older will get more years of use out of him for the original owner, but he'll bring a lower price when he is culled.

This article was originally printed in the Nevada Rancher magazine. To read more from the Rancher, visit www.news4nevada.com. More of Jolyn Young's work can be found at www.jolynyoung.com.

You might also like:

Young ranchers, listen up: 8 tips from an old-timer on how to succeed in ranching

13 utility tractors that will boost efficiency in 2016

Burke Teichert: How to cull the right cow without keeping records

3 weaning methods compared; Which one rises to the top?

6 tips for proper electric fence grounding

9 things to include in your ag lease (that you better have in writing!)

Top 10 issues facing beef producers

What are the implications of food spending as percent of disposable income?

What are the implications of food spending as percent of disposable income?

The past several columns have indirectly focused on the general state of the economy and the subsequent influence on the beef industry.

The first column addressed the general trend in job creation since the financial crisis. The column noted that, “…one of the key indicators for consideration [around monetary policy] stems from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The agency’s Jobs report, formally known as the Employment Situation Summary, is highly anticipated every month by traders as proxy for economic growth. The August report marked 255,000 new jobs being created in July – well ahead of pre-report expectations.

The second column highlighted a newly released report from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) titled, Trends in Family Wealth, 1998 to 2013. The report focused on shifts in family wealth distribution over time.

Most notable within that report, CBO explains that, “The share of wealth held by families in the top 10% of the wealth distribution increased from 67% [in 1998] to 76% [in 2013], whereas the share of wealth held by families in the bottom half of the distribution declined from 3% to 1%.”

disposable income

This week’s illustration strikes closer to home. It features food spending by individuals and families as a percentage of disposable income over time. Clearly, the change over time has had a tremendous impact on economic prosperity and general living standards for Americans in the past 50 to 100 years. 

There are several key takeaways from the data. First, overall spending on food has declined dramatically in the post-war era. In fact, it reached an all-time low in 2008 at 9.5%. Most recently, total food spending equaled 9.7% of disposable income in 2014. 

Second, that reduction is almost solely due to the downward shift in at-home spending. That’s freed up disposable income to do lots of other things—recreation, purchase bigger homes, etc.  Third, practically speaking, the relative proportion of spending at-home versus away-from-home has remained relatively constant in recent years.

Therefore, the real struggle for food dollars in the U.S. is an attempt to shift that relative spending mix: total U.S. food expenditures equaled $1.26 trillion in 2014 – thus, even a small swing one way or the other results in large dollar amounts.

Many of us in agriculture and the food business know the importance of these trends. (And often lament that the general public doesn’t possess more appreciation for this reality.) Nevertheless, it’s always useful to remind ourselves how dramatic the change has been over time. How do you perceive the overall trends? What impact has this had on the beef industry? What changes do you foresee in the future with respect to consumers and their food spending habits? Leave your thoughts in the comments section below. 

Nevil Speer is based in Bowling Green, Ky., and serves as vice president of U.S. operations for AgriClear, Inc. – a wholly-owned subsidiary of TMX Group Limited. The views and opinions of the author expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the TMX Group Limited and Natural Gas Exchange Inc.

 

You might also like:

Young ranchers, listen up: 8 tips from an old-timer on how to succeed in ranching

13 utility tractors that will boost efficiency in 2016

Burke Teichert: How to cull the right cow without keeping records

3 weaning methods compared; Which one rises to the top?

6 tips for proper electric fence grounding

9 things to include in your ag lease (that you better have in writing!)

Top 10 issues facing beef producers

What will your funeral be like?

What will your funeral be like?

The people who show up and tell embarrassing stories you hoped would never be repeated. That song that perfectly sums up your life in just three minutes. The room crowded with everyone wanting to pay their respects, even some you really didn't like all that much.

Have you ever imagined what your funeral might be like?

When thinking about that moment when you ride off into the sunset, you probably imagine yourself being in your 80s or even 90s. Your body worn out. Your skin thick, textured like leather, etched by windburn and sun from decades of working on the farm. You picture yourself peacefully drifting off. You're ready for the next journey.

What you don't imagine is dying young. Watching from above as your rambunctious 11-year-old son screams, desperately calling out for his dad. His enthusiasm for life obliterated. Your wife feeling guilty that she is the one still breathing. She feels helpless with nothing but uncertainty ahead. You don't think about this, but you should.

This was my life in 1993 when my dad drew his last breath under a John Deere tractor. A horrible, tragic scene that haunts me to this day. I remember the sound of sparrows, the smell of April rain and the undeniable feeling of emptiness. A vivid memory that won't leave me alone even with 20 years gone by. Time doesn't ease your pain. That's a statement that anyone who has truly felt loss knows is flowery, feel-good nonsense.

Time does allow you to develop the courage to turn pain into something bigger, something more powerful. You turn pain into passion and hope your story strikes a chord in the life of just one person.

That's why every September, I choke back the tears, man up and share my story of heartbreak and pain with farmers and ranchers. I hope maybe, just maybe, someone cuts this editorial out and hangs it in the barn or on the refrigerator to serve as a sobering reminder that farming and ranching is dangerous.

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that farming and ranching ranks among the most likely occupations in which people can be killed. Twenty-six out of every 100,000 farmers reportedly died of a workplace injury in 2014, the sixth-highest rate of any profession.

I'm not going to claim that every single death could have been prevented. But I know many could have. So do you. You know there are times you made a decision to save time or money that wasn't exactly brilliant. You know that you know farming. You're good at your job. But this doesn't make you invincible. Slow down, evaluate the hazards and avoid shortcuts.

I want no one to feel what I felt, to see what I saw or to hear what I heard more than 20 years ago. I don't want to hear people gossiping about how you died "before your time" and making coffee shop predictions about what will become of your kids.

Do everything you can to make yourself aware of the dangers. I want your funeral to be a day of celebration with embarrassing stories and laughter. Let's work to prevent your kid from sharing a similar story.

Deal?  

Mike Deering is a family farmer from Montgomery City, Mo., and serves as the executive vice president of the Missouri Cattlemen's Association.

You might also like:

Young ranchers, listen up: 8 tips from an old-timer on how to succeed in ranching

13 utility tractors that will boost efficiency in 2016

Burke Teichert: How to cull the right cow without keeping records

3 weaning methods compared; Which one rises to the top?

6 tips for proper electric fence grounding

9 things to include in your ag lease (that you better have in writing!)

NEW photo contest: “Cattle & Colors”

NEW photo contest: “Cattle & Colors”

September is here, and the autumn season is fast approaching. With the change of the season comes silage cutting, weaning and fall calf work, pregnancy checking cows, grain harvest, moving bales home, and preparing the ranch for colder weather.

To celebrate the season, we are kicking off a new photo contest called “Cattle & Colors,” and we’re looking for your best images of ranch scenery, cattle grazing, fall work on the farm, and any picture that best describes the season on your operation.

Here’s what you need to know to enter the contest:

1. Email amanda.radke@penton.com with your photo, caption or title, name and mailing address. One entry per person. (Helpful hint: if you have multiple photos you want to share, consider entering them under a family member’s name.)

2. Entries will be accepted until 8 a.m. on Monday, Sept. 26, and will be posted in a photo gallery, which will be updated daily throughout the contest.

View the entries here.

3. We’ll narrow down the entries and voting will commence, giving you the opportunity to choose our winners.

4. Our champions will be announced on Oct. 3 and will receive $100 and $50 VISA gift cards. In addition, we’ll be randomly selecting three voters to take home a western coffee table photography book. 


Thanks for helping BEEF celebrate fall with this exciting photography contest! I’m looking forward to seeing your submissions. Good luck!

The opinions of Amanda Radke are not necessarily those of beefmagazine.com or Penton Agriculture.

You might also like:

Young ranchers, listen up: 8 tips from an old-timer on how to succeed in ranching

13 utility tractors that will boost efficiency in 2016

Burke Teichert: How to cull the right cow without keeping records

3 weaning methods compared; Which one rises to the top?

6 tips for proper electric fence grounding

Conservation efforts improve sustainability & efficiency for feeder operation

Conservation efforts improve sustainability & efficiency for feeder operation

Sustainability is an integral factor in today’s world of agriculture, and evolving farm practices are demonstrating many ways to incorporate conservation methods into agricultural operations.

Dave Linneman, along with his wife Susan and son Alan, have seen the significance of sustainability with the construction of their new monoslope barn, not only from an environmental aspect but also from economic and animal welfare standpoints.

While the Linneman family has had plenty of experience feeding cattle in open lots, Dave and Alan decided it was time to upgrade after struggling with the challenges created by open lots.

Photo Credit: NRCS

“When it’s hot and they’re in deep mud, you know they’re not gaining,” Dave said. “You’re just spinning your wheels.”

With the efficiency and comfort of both livestock and the operators in mind, the Linneman family contacted the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) staff in 2013 to see what opportunities were available to aid them in meeting their goals to improve their operation.

The NRCS Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) awarded the Linnemans financial assistance to develop an agricultural waste system that would minimize runoff and handle manure.

The Linneman family also received assistance from the Central Big Sioux River Watershed Implementation Project. The Linnemans decided to construct a single-wide monoslope barn with an indoor feed alley. Justin Bonnema worked with the Linnemans as an NRCS agricultural engineer to develop a treatment and manure management plan. Along with the manure stacking pad, the Linnemans included a vegetated treatment area (VTA) in their design.

“It’s about runoff, and that’s why we’re avoiding the open feedlot condition at this site,” Bonnema said. “Any water that runs off and hasn’t been treated or controlled is headed straight to the Big Sioux River and eventually could make its way to the Gulf of Mexico.”

A VTA serves as a buffer zone between animal production facilities and water bodies. Perennial grasses are seeded downslope of the production facility to absorb any potential runoff and nutrients while also reducing erosion.

“Every time it rained, manure ran into the creek,” Alan said. “With the stacking pad and VTA, now it’s all managed.”

In conjunction with the VTA, the Linnemans follow a nutrient management plan that assists them in managing manure and assessing the nutrient requirements of their crop ground. With the new monoslope barn in place, they have vacated feeding in their open lots. To further control runoff, they have seeded the lots back to grass.

Finding an ideal site wasn’t a simple process for the Linnemans. Space limitations were an issue that initially directed the Linneman family into examining the possibilities of a monoslope barn instead of expanding their open lots. The Linnemans eventually settled on a location on the east side of the farm after identifying soils that would provide an adequate foundation. Construction was completed in 2014, and the Linneman family was back in business feeding fat cattle that fall.

With a year of operation in the new monoslope barn completed, the Linnemans can already tell they made the right decision for their cattle and the land. The cattle have gained more quickly this year performance-wise than they typically do in open lots. Alan also noted that the cattle are calmer, have continuous access to feed and are given a reprieve from extreme weather conditions.

While the monoslope barn was a step in the right direction, the Linnemans haven’t stopped there. They have seen the advantages in taking conservational steps on their land and are now enrolled in the NRCS Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) to evaluate their current stewardship levels.

The Linnemans plan to enhance the environmental benefits of their farming practices through CSP. They believe a sustainable operation will enable them to transition a more successful farming operation on to the next generation.

Applications for EQIP are batched annually for funding consideration. October 21, 2016, is the date by which an operator or landowner must sign an application at their local Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) office for Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 funding consideration. For information about technical assistance and conservation programs, visit www.nrcs.usda.gov.

You might also like:

Young ranchers, listen up: 8 tips from an old-timer on how to succeed in ranching

13 utility tractors that will boost efficiency in 2016

Burke Teichert: How to cull the right cow without keeping records

3 weaning methods compared; Which one rises to the top?

6 tips for proper electric fence grounding

Where do Trump and Hillary stand on ag issues? Pick your poison

Getty Images Joe Raedle
<p>Voters will head to the polls for one of the most unusual presidential elections in history. Getty Images/Joe Raedle</p>

When it comes to political risk, you’d be hard-pressed to think of a presidential election in modern history that mattered so much to the nation’s ethos, while offering candidates that inspire so little confidence.

Wobbling out of one chute is a political lifer who makes a habit of poor choices, including alleged criminal offenses for which she seems to be beyond the law’s reach.

Roaring, literally, from another is the proverbial dark horse—one with apparently malleable allegiances, who embraces volume and bullying as political strategy.

In between is a hodge-podge of no-names with little chance.

Even some of the usual high-flying political donors cinched their satchels, counting on more opportunity in the Senate elections.

Most of what I’ve seen and heard about the candidates is secondhand. After watching the first few minutes of what was supposed to be a debate, I refused to watch any more.

So, I trolled candidate websites to get a flavor of their views on various ag-related issues. Take it for what it’s worth.

Agriculture: Both support the Renewable Fuels Standard, so both support subsidizing corn-based ethanol. Which means both support continuing to tie the nation’s food and energy policies at the hip.

Trump—At least in his late-August comments in Iowa, Trump made a distinction between agricultural producers and rural economies, and also highlighted agriculture as a cornerstone of national security.

He even has an agricultural advisory committee that includes some names familiar to those in cattle circles. There are 65 people on the committee—65! They’d better know Roberts Rules of Order and have a hard-nosed parliamentarian.

“Almost 97% of farmers in this country are family-owned and family-managed," Trump said. “It’s not only a great American tradition, but it’s a vital component of America’s economic and national security.”

He also told the Iowa crowd that his administration would do away with job-killing regulation, like the Waters of the United States rule from the Environmental Protection Agency. In talking with business owners of all sizes, he said they are more interested in getting rid of mindless government regulations than they are in the tax cuts he proposes.

Speaking of which, Trump said, “We are going to end this war on the American farmer. We are going to lower the tax rate to 15% and stop the double-taxation on family farms at death.”

Clinton—“America’s rural communities lie at the heart of what makes this country great,” reads Clinton’s issues statement. “The affordability of our food, the independence and sophistication of our energy supply, and the strength of our small communities all depend on a vibrant rural America.”

Her plans for agriculture include such things as:

  • Expand access to equity capital for rural businesses by increasing the number of Rural Business Investment Companies (RBICs).
  • Create a national infrastructure bank and invest in infrastructure.
  • Strengthen USDA grant programs.
  • Double-fund the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development programs.
  • Build a strong local and regional food system by doubling the funding to the Farmers Market Promotion Program and the Local Food Promotion Program.
  • Fully fund the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP).

As for taxes, according to her site, “Simplify and cut taxes for small businesses… Provide tax relief to working families…” No details.

Health Care: One supports the Affordable Care Act, the other one does not.

Trump—“Since March of 2010, the American people have had to suffer under the incredible economic burden of the Affordable Care Act (ACA)—Obamacare… it is not enough to simply repeal this terrible legislation. We will work with Congress to make sure we have a series of reforms ready for implementation that follow free market principles and that will restore economic freedom and certainty to everyone in this country.”

Clinton—“As your president, I want to build on the progress we’ve made (with ACA). I’ll do more to bring down health care costs for families, ease burdens on small businesses, and make sure consumers have the choices they deserve.”

Trade: Both candidates paint their rhetoric regarding trade with hues of populist isolationism. Both oppose the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Not exactly want you want to hear with cattle prices heading south and beef exports mattering more to beef’s potential in the U.S.

Immigration: As vital as border security is—America should have had it long ago—and as appealing as a wall might seem, history suggests all will be breached, from the Great Wall to the Atlantic Wall, no matter who pays for it.

Trump—The three core principles of Trump’s plan for immigration reform:

  • There must be a wall across the southern border.
  • Laws passed in accordance with our Constitutional system of government must be enforced.
  • Any immigration plan must improve jobs, wages and security for all Americans.

Clinton—In addition to promising comprehensive immigration reform, Clinton says she will defend Executive actions taken by President Obama that yielded:

  • Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DAVA)—a program by which illegal aliens younger than 31, who say they came to the U.S. as a child, can receive a two-year legalization amnesty; most can seek a work permit.
  • Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA)—a program for parents of a U.S. citizen or lawful U.S. resident who was born on or before Nov. 20, 2014. Parents who lived continuously in the U.S. since or before Jan. 1, 2010 could receive a 3-year work permit and avoid deportation. 26 states are suing the federal government over this one.

 

You might also like:

Young ranchers, listen up: 8 tips from an old-timer on how to succeed in ranching

Burke Teichert: How to cull the right cow without keeping records

3 weaning methods compared; Which one rises to the top?

Top 10 issues facing beef producers

Market outlook: Are cattle traders trying to catch a falling knife?

AETA announces trade show management team

The American Equestrian Trade Association (AETA) has hired Unbridled Solutions, a Denver-based event design and marketing agency for production of the AETA International Trade Show.

“We are excited to be working with the Unbridled team,” said AETA Board of Directors President Kelly Herd. “This partnership will propel the success of the AETA International Trade Show for years to come.” Herd points out that AETA is a non-profit organization run by its members who are in the equestrian trade. AETA recently took full control of the AETA International Trade Show. The first show under AETA’s management will be held January 28 – 30, 2017 at the Greater Philadelphia Expo Center in Oaks, PA.

“We are impressed with Unbridled’s passion for event production and their commitment to working with AETA to reimagine our tradeshow and bring it into the 21st century,” said Herd. “Unbridled Solutions brings impressive experience, a meticulous attention to detail and an energetic presence to the 2017 AETA event.”

Unbridled Solutions has been designing and executing creative solutions for events since 2001, including tradeshows ranging in scope up to 4,000 attendees.

Herd also announced that AETA has contracted with General Exposition Services, Inc., to provide a wide variety of decorating and trade show services. General Expo has worked with AETA Trade Show exhibitors in the past. However, Herd is quick to point out that General Expo is fully committed to AETA’s vision and pledge to moving the show forward. “We are also pleased that exhibitors will no longer have to pay long-standing ‘middle-man’ fees related to decorating,” said Herd. In addition reduced booth costs, AETA is not marking up decorating services like former show management.

He also noted that the Greater Philadelphia Expo Center has been very cooperative in working with AETA to reduce costs and improve services.

“I am also pleased to report that AETA has over 350 booths committed to returning to the January show in Oaks, PA. Just weeks since the August Trade show, AETA has over 100 booths already contracted. We are overwhelmed with excitement at what the improved AETA International Trade Show will bring to the industry,” said Herd. Exhibitors who commit early to the show will be made Charter Exhibitors, ensuring priority booth selection. A list of AETA International Trade Show exhibitors can be found on AETA’s website.” http://www.aeta.us/trade-show-information