Connect with us


Dr. Prevatt Says Cattle Prices Could be Slightly Lower in 2013

Brandon Moseley



By Brandon Moseley
Alabama Political Reporter

Auburn University Agriculture Economics Professor Walt Prevatt addressed the membership of the Alabama Cattlemen’s Association about the outlook for cattle prices in 2013 at their 70th annual convention in Birmingham.
Prevatt said that the stock market is rosy because of U.S. monetary policy.  The Federal Reserve has been printing money which has influenced the Dow Jones.

Dr. Prevatt said that the U.S. has seen a downward trend in unemployment, but that 7.6% unemployment is still high.  Another 7-8% of the population has quit looking for work.  Dr. Prevatt said that he was hopeful that the U.S. government would get more focused on job creation, but that he was not optimistic.

Prevatt said that beef is the preferred meat of choice; but that beef demand is hurt when consumers have limited incomes.  Prevatt said that the U.S. Senate passed a $trillion in tax increases that night, but he did not expect that to pass the Congress.  Prevatt said, “I am concerned about additional taxes we may see in the future.”  The combination of increasing taxes which reduce disposable incomes and a still weak employment will likely mean that consumers could have less discretionary income for steaks this year.  “I am real concerned about demand.”  “We need more people employed.”

Dr. Prevatt said that the growth of the money supply is moving the economic numbers.  Prevatt said that overall he expect that we are going to continue to see the same rate of growth and the same monetary policy.

Prevatt said that total meat consumption per consumer has been dropping for the last several years due to an aging population.  The amount of beef that the average American eats has been declining since the 1970s.  Turkey consumption is flat and per capita chicken consumption has been down since 2004.  “Consumers are not spending as much on meat.”  People are making different choices and choosing to spend their money on things like cell phones.
Choice beef prices have climbed to 530 cents a pound up from 290 cents in 2000.  The restaurant business dropped during the Recession; but demand for ground beef rose as steak demand weakened.  The steak demand came back strong last year.  “Export demand outlook looks good.”  Beef exports have risen to 2.3 billion pounds after it crashed during the mad cow disease scare and the value of that beef has risen to $5.5 billion in exports.

Prevatt said that Japan has opportunity of improvement in the amount of American beef that they concern, but he is not optimistic about the Mexican market.  The U.S. is getting competition from New Zealand.  “Right now New Zealand is putting an awful lot of product on the market.”  Beef exports to Russia, Mexico, and Vietnam are all down, but total exports are up because the currency exchange rate is favorable due to U.S. monetary policy.  “I don’t fully understand what the government is doing.” Prevatt said that the weak dollar helps us with our exports and decreases imports.  “The weak dollar has really helped us with beef exports.  If you strengthen the dollar you will reduce the amount of product we are shipping.”

Public Service Announcement

The declining number of American cows also means higher beef prices.  Prevatt said there just is not as many cattle any more.  There were 30.9 million cows in 2011.  That dropped to 30.2 million in 2012 and is down to just 29.3 million in 2013.  There were 46 million American beef cows in 1975.

Prevatt said that declining cattle inventories are not just profitability driven but is also limited by available land resources.  Prevatt said that a lot of that land has been plowed up and turned into cropland, planted in pine trees, or sold as rural home sites.  Prevatt said that the U.S. has lost a half million head of beef cattle just since 2010.  “We are going to have to retool and hold some replacement heifers back,” to replace their aging mothers.  Prevatt said that we will see a significant increase in prices in this market when those heifers are retained to become cows instead of sold to the feedlots for the beef market.

Prevatt said that the U.S. is importing up to 1.4 million head of live cattle from Mexico and another 700,000 head from Canada.  The industry is also making up for the declining cattle numbers by growing out the cattle longer so that they are harvested at much higher carcass weights.  In recent years, the hot carcass weight (the weight of the carcass shortly after the head, hide, blood, hooves, stomach contents, and organs are all removed) has climbed to 880 pounds….up from 830 pounds just a few years ago.  It was 475 pounds in 1975, but the genetics of the cow herd have changed substantially since then too larger, growthier animals.

Prevatt said. “I think you are going to see less supply in 2013.”  Dr. Prevatt is also predicting weaker demand so cattlemen could see slightly lower prices in 2013 than they received in 2012.

Another large factor to consider is the price of grains especially corn and soybeans.  Alabama cattle are born on the farm and grow up on pasture eating a forage based diet.  However since the American consumer prefers the flavor of grain fed beef, those half grown calves travel to the west where they are ‘finished’ on grain in feedlots.  When the cost of grain is up those feedlots pay less for the Alabama calves.  For the last few years grain prices have been up as more grain production went into ethanol production.

Corn has traded as high in some places as $7; but the futures price has recently dropped from $6.60 a bushel to $5.65 a bushel.  Prevatt said that he is hoping that 99 million acres of corn is planted in this country this year.  If that happens and there is a strong harvest Prevatt said some experts have predicted corn trading in the $4s; but much of this year’s corn crop is already pre-sold at the higher prices.  Prevatt however warned that Kansas, South Dakota, Nebraska, Colorado, and many of those other states have been unusually dry this winter.  If they don’t get enough moisture less acreage will be planted, harvests will be lower, grain prices will be up, and the sell prices of those calves could drop when they go to market as the feedlots are forced to pay more for the available feed grains.

Prevatt said that the cost of breakeven per calf for the Alabama cattlemen was based on the cost of hay and feed to get the cows through the winter months, the cost of fuel and fertilizer used to grow the hay and pastures, the percentage of cows who successfully raise a calve each year, and the weight and sell price of those calves.  Prevatt said that ranchers with costs of less than $500 per cow, a 90% calf weaning rate, and weaning weights in excess of 600 pounds are likely to do well financially.  Ranchers with production cost of greater than $600 per cow need greater production levels and higher cattle prices for them to breakeven.  If productions costs are higher than $700 per cow, the rancher will make money only in the best possible combination of production and high prices.
Prevatt said that cattlemen have to look at seasonal price trends to make purchases of commodities like feed grains.  ”Where we can, join with neighbors to buy in bulk.  “That corn production we have been banking on may not materialize.”  Prevatt said that average annual temperatures have been increasing since the mid 1990s, which if it continues potentially could lead to more frequent droughts.  “We are not going to see the cheap feedstuffs we have seen in years past.”  Prevatt said many cattlemen in Alabama need to decrease their stocking rates so that they have to purchase less grains to supplement their cows in droughts and winter.  Prevatt told the cattlemen, “If you are currently profitable now is the time to grow your operation.”

Dr. Prevatt predicted that finished 2013 Choice Steers would trade out of the feedlot for$1.20  to $1.30 a pound (~$1750 per head).  750 pound feeder steers in Alabama should trade for $1.20 to 1.36 a pound this year (~$960 per animal).  550 pound weaned steers should trade for $1.38 to $1.50 per pound ($792 per calf).  Cull cows sold for utility meat should trade between $.73 and $81 per pound ($847 for the typical ~10 year old 1100 pound cow).  Dr. Prevatt said that some cattlemen might benefit from locking into the futures prices now rather than waiting to sell their calf crop on the cash market in the fall.

Brandon Moseley is a senior reporter with eight and a half years at Alabama Political Reporter. You can email him at [email protected] or follow him on Facebook. Brandon is a native of Moody, Alabama, a graduate of Auburn University, and a seventh generation Alabamian.



Under cloak of secrecy, dark money nonprofit targets Birmingham law firm

From the beginning, Forbes’s “” website set out to tarnish the law firm by claiming to expose “unsettling controversies surrounding Balch & Bingham,” much of which stems from allegations, inference and speculation.

Bill Britt



A mosaic of headlines from Forbes's website, which attack the Birmingham law firm Balch & Bingham.

A California-based, dark money organization has set up shop in Alabama. It appears the move has substantially improved the group’s financial outlook and altered its core mission.

Because of the group’s federally protected status, it is impossible for the public to know who is pouring cash into Consejo de Latinos Unidos — translated as United Latinos Council — but a state tax lien and its CEO’s website may offer a peek at what might be hiding behind the nonprofit’s dark-money veil of secrecy.

Founded in 2001, and originally headquartered in Los Angeles, CDLU’s stated mission, according to reports was to “foster, encourage and develop educational opportunities and programs in Latino communities.”

Leaving its Latino-centric advocacy roots, the current website says the group’s “primary mission is helping to provide urgent and life-saving medical care for those in need with nowhere else to turn.”

Although it relocated to Birmingham sometime between 2013 and 2014, CDLU has never registered with the Alabama Secretary of State’s Office — and its board of directors is still located in California and elsewhere.

In 2017, it appears CDLU once again found an added purpose for its activities far from its previously stated missions.

CDLU’s CEO, Kevin Brendan Forbes, who goes by his initials “K.B.” launched a website in 2017, on which he targets Birmingham-based law firm Balch & Bingham.

Public Service Announcement

Mother Jones characterizes Forbes as a “self-styled ‘child of the Reagan revolution,’ [who] grew up in a mixed household in a Los Angeles suburb.” Forbes also worked for far right-wing commentator and one time Republican presidential hopeful Pat Buchanan, as well as media-mogul and former Republican presidential contender Steve Forbes. (The men are not related.)

Why a leader of a nonprofit would devote daily energy to attacking a law firm is not entirely clear, but it seems to have begun with what Forbes refers to as the “Newsome Conspiracy Case,” which involves an extended court battle between Burt Newsome, a Birmingham attorney, and Balch & Bingham.

Not only did CDLU’s focus change when Forbes became close to Newsome, the organization’s fortunes began to improve, as well.

Forbes is considered the driving force behind the group’s ventures in Alabama. He is also personal friends with Newsome. Facebook posts show both Newsome and Forbes’ wives enjoying social events on multiple occasions.

There is a direct friendship between the wives of Forbes and Newsome. They have been friends since at least 2016 and posts show a number of public interactions since then.

Forbes reserved the website “” shortly after the Newsome and Forbes families formed a friendship, and the website’s first articles were aimed squarely at Newsome’s lawsuit with Balch & Bingham.

From the beginning, the website set out to tarnish the law firm by claiming to expose “unsettling controversies surrounding Balch & Bingham,” much of which stems from allegations, inference and speculation.

Under the banner of his nonprofit, Forbes has also taken further steps to attack the firm’s largest clients.

Forbes has taken credit for costing Balch & Bingham hundreds of thousands of dollars in client fees while also remaining fixated on the firm, writing Newsome a check to settle the disputed lawsuit with CDLU as mediator.

Why would CDLU offer itself as a mediator in a private lawsuit especially given the fact that Forbes is not an attorney?

From a ragtag blog to a more sophisticated web presence, has expanded its coverage to include those associated with Balch & Bingham.

Veteran politicos who asked not to be directly quoted in this article to avoid being dragged into Forbes’ intrigues suggest that those with other darker motives could use the site for a broader political agenda. These insiders question whether political operatives are now feeding Forbes opposition research and money to do their bidding.

As a federally sanctioned nonprofit, CDLU must complete an annual tax filing.

Federal Form 990, the annual statement that must be filed by all IRS recognized nonprofit organizations, shows that in the past five years, annual gross income of CDLU averaged $7,030. The last 990 filed for the year 2018 shows CDLU finishing the year with a $12,363 deficit, and all the 990s filed by CDLU for the past decade show the nonprofit has never paid anyone a salary.

While the 990 for 2019 is not due until November of this year, a tax lien from the state of Alabama filed on January 3, 2020, suggests that in the first three months of 2019, CDLU paid someone or some number of people between $186,000 to more than $500,000. The lien for $11,671.73 was for unpaid withholding tax to the state of Alabama — including up to a 25 percent penalty.

Depending on the number of people paid and the amount each person was paid, this lien represents a minimum of $186,000 in compensation paid and a maximum possibility of more than $580,000.

As a 501(C)(3), Forbes’ organization is not required under federal law to publicly disclose donors. As a charitable organization, it is barred from engaging in political activity or supporting political candidates, and while most “dark money” groups are 501(C)(4)s for this reason, (C)(3)s operate with similar opacity in regard to their funding sources, though many publicly disclose their donors in the interest of transparency.

501(C)(3)s are also required to remain true to their founding purpose unless they notify the IRS in advance of the change in purpose.

An organization with a long history of little income and zero salaries appears from the lien documents to have paid more in compensation in the first four months of 2019, than it had collected in gross income for more than five years. Where did the money come from and what was CDLU doing to attract this kind of investor?

In his writings, Forbes has made it clear that paying Newsome would make the attacks on Balch & Bingham and the firm’s clients go away.

Excerpts from an article Forbes has posted at least twice summarize the central focus of his efforts:

So, we ask, would it not have been cheaper to simply resolve the Newsome Conspiracy Case for $3 million? If Balch & Bingham had simply reached out to us, the CDLU, and tried to resolve the Newsome Conspiracy Case in early 2017, this blog would not exist and our advocacy efforts at the CDLU would not be focused on educating the public, law enforcement, legislators, corporate leadership, and institutional investors on Wall Street about Balch & Bingham's alleged unsavory if not criminal conduct. When Newsome originally wanted to settle this matter, back in 2015, his legal team asked for three things: An apology. The end of the tracking of Newsome's banking cases by Balch partners. $150,000 for revenue lost from the alleged defamation. Balch rejected the offer and now that decision has cost them millions and millions more to come.

Forbes’s words would seem to indicate that he set out to harm Balch & Bingham to force them to pay Newsome.

Is Forbes attacking the firm’s clients to coerce a payment to Newsome? Did someone pay CDLU hundreds of thousands of dollars in 2019, as is indicated by the tax lien. Did Forbes pay his friend Newsome all or any of this money? Where did the money come from and who did Forbes pay?

Nonprofit organizations like CDLU do not have to reveal their donors. But during 2019, Forbes’ attacks on Balch & Bingham’s clients took on a wide-ranging field of subjects.

Politicos, who spoke with APR, posed the following questions: Did someone recognize that Forbes had created a communication channel through which they could accomplish goals that had nothing to do with Burt Newsome? Was a rival law firm paying Forbes to attack Balch to steal Balch’s clients? Could environmental groups or their supporters be paying Forbes to attack utility companies? Were Washington-based lobbying firms paying Forbes to bolster their efforts to take Balch’s national lobbying contracts?

The answer to these questions would easily be resolved if Forbes revealed who was paying him.

Forbes has indicated in writing that “this blog would not exist” if someone would just write Newsome a very large check.

Forbes has attacked clients of Balch & Bingham and told the clients the attacks would go away if they forced Balch to settle with Newsome, according to APR‘s sources.

A veteran of hundreds of legal skirmishes who, like others, asked not to be quoted because of Forbes’ propensity to write unfounded accusations, said Forbes’ actions in his opinion rose to extortion and torturous interference of business.

Forbes has never fully explained why his nonprofit moved from California to Alabama, nor why CDLU’s mission changed from Latino advocacy in Los Angeles to attacking a Birmingham law firm and its client.

When social media hoaxes and fake news are trade craft, there is a ready market for blogs like, insiders believe.

The question that may need answering by law-enforcement is what is going on at CDLU that would allow them to operate under a cloak of federally sanctioned secrecy?

Continue Reading


Tenth state inmate dies after testing positive for COVID-19

As of Tuesday, 97 inmates had tested positive for COVID-19.

Eddie Burkhalter



As of Tuesday, 97 inmates had tested positive for COVID-19. (Stock photo)

A tenth Alabama inmate has died after testing positive for COVID-19, according to the state.

Raymond Earl Allen, 59, who was serving at the St. Clair Correctional Facility died Monday at a local hospital, where he had been taken after exhibiting symptoms for coronavirus, the Alabama Department of Corrections said Tuesday. 

Allen was considered high-risk because he had end-stage renal disease, according to ADOC. 

ADOC also said another inmate at St. Clair has tested positive for COVID-19, bringing the total number of confirmed cases among inmates at the prison to 28. Six workers at the prison have also tested positive for the virus. 

The department also announced that four workers at the Kilby Correctional Facility, two at the Fountain Correctional Facility and one at the Alex City Community Based Facility and Community Work Center also tested positive for COVID-19. 

As of Tuesday, 97 inmates had tested positive for COVID-19, while 28 have since recovered. Of the state’s approximately 22,000 inmates, 490 have been tested. Of the 184 confirmed cases among prison staff, 100 have recovered. 

Public Service Announcement

Two prison workers at the Julia Tutwiler Prison for Woman have died after testing positive for coronavirus. There have been confirmed cases of the virus in 27 of the state’s 32 facilities.

Continue Reading


COVID-19 kills 228 Alabamians in last three weeks as deaths pass 1,000

At least 1,007 Alabamians have died from COVID-19 since the first case was diagnosed in the state in mid-March.

Brandon Moseley



At least 1,007 Alabamians have died from COVID-19 since the first case was diagnosed in the state in mid-March. (Stock Photo)

The Alabama Department of Public Health reported Tuesday that more than 1,000 Alabamians have now died from COVID-19. At least 228 of those were killed in just the past three weeks.

At least 1,007 Alabamians have died from COVID-19 since the first case was diagnosed in the state in mid-March, according to the Alabama Department of Public Health. Another 26 deaths are listed as probably COVID-19 deaths.

By June 1, 18,246 Alabamians had tested positive. By June 17, 26,914 cases had been diagnosed in the state. In the twenty days that have followed, another 18,349 Alabamians have tested positive. As of Tuesday, 45,263 tested positive, with another 888 positive coronavirus tests announced on Tuesday.

Alabama’s coronavirus epidemic was expected to peak in April while the state was under a shelter in place order. By April 30, the state began lifting restrictions to reopen the economy.

On Tuesday, Dr. Anthony Fauci told reporters that Alabama and other states may have reopened their economies “too soon.” Since the Memorial Day weekend, cases of coronavirus have risen at an alarming pace. On Monday, hospitalizations for COVID-19 set a new record at 1,016.

The combination of a surge of cases, many Alabamians out and about without masks or face coverings, and large holiday gatherings over the Fourth of July weekend make many public health officials concerned that we could be seeing dramatically higher numbers of cases, hospitalizations, and even deaths moving forward into late July and early August.

Public Service Announcement

Fauci told members of the Alabama press corps that 20 to 40 percent of people who are infected are not showing any symptoms, but they could still be spreading the virus.

Fauci said that wearing a mask or cloth face covering and staying at least six feet away from other people is the best way to avoid becoming infected with the coronavirus — or transmitting the virus to other people if you are already infected, but just don’t know it.

Several cities and counties in Alabama have already implemented a mask requirement.

State officials are urging Alabamians to take personal responsibility for their own health.

Thus far the global pandemic has killed 543,596 and known coronavirus cases are rapidly approaching twelve million.

Continue Reading


Alabama lawmaker pre-files legislation to allow removal of Confederate monuments

If passed, the measure would permit counties and cities to relocate historic monuments currently located on public property.

Brandon Moseley



A Confederate monument in Birmingham's Linn Park was removed. As have monuments and memorials in Mobile and on the campus of the University of Alabama.

Alabama State Rep. Juandalynn Givan, D-Birmingham, introduced legislation this week in advance of the 2021 legislative session that, if passed, would permit counties and cities to relocate historic monuments currently located on public property. Givan’s bill, HB8, would also provide for the relocation of historic memorials to sites appropriate for public display.

“Across the state of Alabama, citizens are calling for the removal of prominently placed statues and monuments that are insensitive or offensive to the communities that surround them,” Givan said. “City and county governments must be able to address the demands of their citizens. This legislation provides a tool for local governments to safely remove these artifacts so that they can be moved to a site more appropriate for preserving or displaying the historical monument.”

Removing the monuments and historical markers is currently illegal under Alabama’s Memorial Preservation Act, which the state Legislature passed in 2017. Givan has been an outspoken opponent of that Republican-sponsored legislation. In 2018, Givan introduced a measure to repeal the bill that barred the removal of monuments.

“I believe HB8 can achieve bipartisan support,” Givan said. “My bill seeks to balance the wishes of the people. It respects the will of communities that want the monuments removed. It also respects those who wish to preserve history. With this legislation, Confederate monuments could be relocated to a public site, like Confederate Memorial Park, whose purpose and mission is to interpret and tell these stories. When the Legislature convenes, I hope to have the support of both the House of Representatives and the Senate.”

If enacted, HB8 would permit county and municipal governments to remove memorial monuments, including permanent statues, portraits and markers, located on public property in their jurisdictions. It would require a transfer of ownership of the removed monuments to the Alabama Department of Archives and History or the Alabama Historical Commission. Finally, the bill would instruct Archives and History or the Historical Commission to maintain and display monuments removed by local authorities in a location accessible for public display.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, which keeps track of Confederate monuments and memorials across the country, released an update to its Whose Heritage report, which tracks symbols of the Confederacy on public land across the United States. They report at least 30 Confederate symbols have been removed or relocated since George Floyd’s death on May 25, 2020.

These include 24 monuments removed, 5 monuments relocated and the Mississippi state flag replaced. Since the Charleston church shooting in 2015, 115 total symbols have been removed from public spaces. These include 87 monuments that have been removed or relocated from public spaces. At least 78 monuments were removed and nine were relocated.

Public Service Announcement

SPLC says there are still nearly 1,800 Confederate symbols on public land, and 739 of those symbols are monuments. The SPLC has prepared an “action guide” to help community activists target Confederate historical markers and memorials for removal.

President Donald Trump has denounced what he calls “cancel culture” that seeks to remove historical monuments and statutes.

“There is a growing danger that threatens every blessing our ancestors fought so hard for, struggled, they bled to secure,” Trump said. “Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values, and indoctrinate our children.”

Continue Reading



The V Podcast