april 1969 exas ~~)us1ness rev1e ~~ A Monthly Summary of Business and Economic Conditions in Texas Bureau of Business Research The University of Texas at Austin TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW VOL. XLIII, NO. 4, APRIL 1969 Editor, Stanley A. Arbingast; Associate Editor, Robert H. Ryan; Managing Editor, Graham Blackstock Editorial Board : Stanley A. Arbingast, Chairman; John R. Stockton; Francis B. May; Robert H. Ryan; Graham Blackstock CONTENTS ARTICLES 101: THE BUSINESS Williamson SITUATION IN TEXAS, by Robert B. 104: THE FUTURE SUOF THE PRES PPLY OF OIL--PART ONE : THE PATTERN ENT , by Robert l\1. Lockwood 111 : CONSTRUCTION Smith IN TEXAS, FEBRUARY 1969, by La mar TABLES 102: SELECTED BAROMETERS OF TF.XAS BUSINESS 102: BUSINESS-ACTIVITY INDEXES FOR 20 SELECTED TEXAS CITIES 103: RETAIL-SALES TRENDS BY KIND OF BUSINESS 104: ESTIMATED TOTAL AREAS AND SEDI!\1ENTARY AREAS AND VOLUMES, WORLD AND UNITED STATES 105: ESTIMATED TOTAL AREA AND EFFECTIVE SEDIMENTARY BASIN AREA AND VOLU:0.1E, UNITED STATES AND TEXAS 106: SUGGESTED CLASSIFICATION OF CRUDE OIL ORIGINALLY CONTAINED IN THE EARTH 'S CRUST 107: DRILLING IN THE UNITED STATES AND TEXAS, 1859­1967 107: ESTIMATED TOTAL DISCOVERIES OF CRUDE OIL, UNITED STATES AND TEXAS AS OF JANUARY 1, SELECTED YEARS, 1956-1966 108: ESTIMATED TOTAL DISCOVERIES OF CRUDE OIL, WORLD, UNITED STATES, AKD TEXAS, 1962 AND 1968 109: CUMULATIVE DRILLING DENSITY, UNITED STATES, 1859­1967 112: ESTIMATED VALUES OF BUILDING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS 113: CREDIT RATIOS IN DFPARTMENT AND APPAREL STORES 113 : CANTALOUPES FOR FRESH MARKET-SPRING 114 : LOCAL BUSINESS CONDITIONS BAROMETERS OF TEXAS BUSINESS (inside back cover) CHARTS TEXAS BUSINESS ACTIVITY 101 : CRUDE-OIL PRODUCTION, TEXAS 102: CRUDE-OIL RUNS TO STILLS, TEXAS 102: INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION, TEXAS 103 : RECORD DRILLING DEPTHS, UNITED STATES, 1898-1967 105: TOTAL BUILDING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS 111 : RESIDENTIAL BUILDING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS 111: NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS 111 : INDUSTRIAL ELECTRIC-POWER USE, TEXAS 113 : DOLLAR ESTIMATES OF ANNUAL TEXAS RETAIL SALES 113: BUREAU OF BUSINESS RESEARCH Director: John R. Stockton Associate Director and Resources Specialist: Stanley A. Arbingast Assistant to the Director: Florence Escott Consulting Statistician: Francis B. May Cooperating Faculty: Charles T. Clark, Larry L. Crum, William T. Hold, Jerry Todd, Robert B. Williamson Administrative Assistant: Margaret Robb Research Associates : Graham Blackstock, Michael Bonine, Willetta Dement, John Franklin, William Gruben, James Harrison, Letitia Hitz, Ida M. Lambeth, Robert M. Lockwood, Stephanie Lowe, Robert H. Ryan, Lamar Smith, Jr., Tim Throckmorton Research Assistants: James Blackburn, Charles Green, Terry Throckmorton Systems Analyst: Dennis W. Cooper Statistical Assistants: Mildred Anderson, Constance Cool· edge, Judith Moran, Glenda Riley Statistical Technicians: Doris Dismuke, Mary Gorham, Roy D. Pursley Cartographers : Penelope Lewis, James Weiler, Douglas Winters, Jr. Librarian: Merle Danz Administrat~ve Secretary: Ellen Young Senior Secretaries: Binnie McCreary, Jeanette Pryor Senior Clerk Typists: Shirley Rosendahl Administrative Clerk: Nita Teeters Clerk Typist: Linda Cantu Senior Clerk : Salvador B. Macias Clerks : Faye Bartula, James Donaho, David King Offset Press Operators: Robert Dorsett, Daniel P. Rosas Published monthly by the Bureau of Busineu Research, Gradualt School of Business, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Tei".' 78712. Second-class postage paid at Austin. Texas. Content of tbia publi­cation is not copyrilrhted and may be reproduced freely, but acknoll· ledJrment of source will be appreciated. The views expraiaed by au~ are not necessarily those of the Bureau of Business Research. Sublcr•P­tion, $3.00 a year; individual copies, 26 cente. . R h · mber of the Associated University Bureaus of Business and Economic Research. The Bureau of Busmess esearc is a me THE BUSINESS SITUATION IN TEXAS Robert B. Williamson The pace of business activity in Texas slowed during February, but the level of activity registered a significant decline only when compared to the record high reached in January. The seasonally adjusted index of Texas business activity was 243 percent of the 1957-1959 base-period average in February, compared with the record 252 per­cent of January and 211 percent in February 1968. Texas industrial activity as measured by industrial electric­power consumption did not reflect any slowing, however, but continued to rise to a record high in February. The state's important oil industry showed conflicting trends during February, but the basic economic position of the industry appeared to be improving. Oil demand rose and crude-oil runs to stills increased 7 percent after seasonal adjustment. A part of the February increase in crude runs reflected the settlement of strikes which had curtailed refinery operations during the previous month. The adjusted level of crude runs during February was below the average achieved during the first part of 1968, when demands were still strongly influenced by the cur­tailment of Middle East supplies following the June 1967 Arab-Israeli War. Nevertheless, the February level was the second-highest in the past six months. Crude-oil pro­duction in Texas during February moved in the opposite direction, decreasing 5 percent from January with sea­sonal adjustment. Compared with a year ago February, crude-oil output was down 14 percent, and compared with the August 1967 peak it was down 22 percent. Rising demands and production quotas point to a turn­around in Texas crude-oil production. The Texas Railroad Commission raised the permitted rate of oil production from 42.8 percent of the maximum permissible in February to 45.6 percent in March. For April the rate was raised still higher, to 49.9 percent, the highest since September 1967. The actual increase in Texas oil output for March might be somewhat less than the normal seasonal amount, but the projected increase for April would represent an unusually large seasonally adjusted gain. Evidence of an improvement of oil demands relative to supplies includes a decrease in crude-oil inventories and nationwide in­creases in gasoline and crude-oil prices during February and early March. The crude-oil price increases have ranged up to about 20 cents a barrel, or about 7 percent. Building construction provided important support to Texas business activity during February. The seasonally adjusted index of construction authorized in the state during February, although down from the high levels registered in the final quarter of last year, was up 9 percent from January and 20 percent from February 1968. The February rise in Texas building authorizations was the result of a rise in the nonresidential component to the highest seasonally adjusted level since August 1967. Resi­dential building permits reflected a further decline from their fourth-quarter peaks. The largest year-to-year in­creases in Texas nonresidential authorizations during the first two months of the year were in response to a growth 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 TEXAS BUSINESS ACTVITY Index Adjusted for Seasonal Variation-1957-1959=100 HH > & ... :/. aA nfi" ' . um j' urn !mm :: m::, mu r :·, :: :: 1::: mm } 1mm 1:: ..-"r'-..,-. :: ...-............ rm ·,,,,, _,,.,., .... ?TI' PE . mm ::: urn im : /W Ii: 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 NOTE: Shaded areas indicate periods of decline of total business activity in the United States. SOURCE: Based on bank debits reported by the Federal Re serve Bank of Dallas and adjusted for seasonal variation and changes in the price level by the Bureau of Business Research. 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 \PRIL 1969 101 Year-to-date Feb Jan average Index 1969 1969 1969 Texas business activity 242.6 • Crude-oil production . . 100.7. Crude-oil runs to stills 130.2 Total electric-power use 236. 7 • Industrial electric-power use ... .............224.4 • Bank debits ... . . . . ...269.3 Urban building permits issued ............208.6 Residential . . . . . ... ..165.2 Nonresidential . . ... . 280.5 Total nonfarm employment . . . . . . . . 142.7 . Manufacturing employment .........147.6 • Total unemployment ... 61.5 Insured employment ... 41.9 Average weekly earnings- manufacturing ......141.6* 252.0 • 105.7 • 121.7 232.9 • 213.6 • 279.0 191.1 172.6 217.1 141.5 • 145.1 • 63.4 44.5 139.1 • Average weekly hours-manufacturing . . . . . . 101.3 • 100.5 • 247.3 103.2 126.0 234.8 219.0 274.2 199.9 168.9 248.8 142.1 146.4 62.5 43.2 140.4 100.9 Percent change Year-to-date average Feb 1969 1969 from from Jan 1969 1968 -- 17 10 4 11 14 21 29 23 13 31 6 2 5 • Preliminary. in final demands for. consumer goods and services and were mainly for structures other than buildings (with a professional football stadium in the Dallas-Fort Worth Area the major item in this category), stores and mer­cantile buildings, and educational buildings. The prospect of continued high levels of nonresidential construction in Texas during the remainder of 1969 is sug­gested by recent survey indications that business spending for new plant and equipment throughout the nation will increase nearly 14 percent this year. This would be the sharpest rise since the 1966 boom in investment spending. Residential construction prospects appear less rosy. New housing starts in the nation and the state were still at high levels during February and basic housing demands remained large, but the current trend in homebuilding was downward, and adverse influences such as high lumber prices and an unexpectedly severe tightening of mortgage credit supplies threatened to cause further declines in the number of housing starts. Interest rates are rising and are expected to remain high throughout 1969. The chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in late February submitted to the Congressional Joint Economic Commi tee a set of Federal Reserve forecasts which indicated that interest rates would remain high for the rest of the year and that commercial banks probably would have to en­gage in even more stringent rationing of credit to their customers. And, in mid-March the prime lending rate of major banks was raised from 7 percent to 7.5 percent. The move was initiated in New York but was soon followed in Dallas and in other financial centers throughout Texas and the rest of the nation. While government monetary policies are helping to restrict credit supplies and to dampen inflationary business expansion, government fiscal policy is expected to become less restrictive as the year progresses, with the federal government's budget surplus in the second half of 1969 estimated as smaller than in the first half. •• Chan&"e is less than one half of 1 rcent. 3SO 300 2SO 200 ISO 100 so 2SO 200 ISO 100 so CRUDE-OIL PRODUCTION, TEXAS NOTE: Shaded arcur.• indicll.lfl period• of decline of total bueineH activity in th• United SU.tel. CRUDE-OIL RUNS TO STILLS, TEXAS 110 IOO ,.. IOO ,,. 100 .. uo IOO 110 100 .. A A '~ ., l"W" .. 1956 1957 1951 1959 1960 1961 1962 196J 196' 1965 1966 1967 1961 ,,., NOTE: Sh&dt1d area• indicate period• of decline of total bu1int1H activity tn the United Statt•· Employment gains provide a basic measure of the growth in overall economic demands and general business activity. In both Texas and the nation job totals have risen to record highs and unemployment rates have fallen to the lowest levels since the Korean War. While the na­tional une-mployment rate during the past few months has averaged slightly above 3 percent, the Texas unem· TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW RETAIL-SALES TRENDS BY KIND OF BUSINESS (Unadjusted Percent change Feb from Jan Actual Number of Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Jan-Feb 1969 reporting Normal from from from Kind of business stores seasonal• Jan 1969 Feb 1968 Jan-Feb 1968 DURABLE GOODS Automotive storest ... . . 327 -2 Motor-vehicle dealers 187 Furniture and household- appliance storest ...139 -6 Furniture stores ... .. 84 Lumber, building-material, and hardware dealers 193 2 Farm-implement dealers ··········· · 17 Hardware stores ... .. 48 Lumber and building- material dealers . ...128 NONDURABLE GOODS Apparel stores ... .. ... . 270 -20 Family clothing stores 39 Men's and boys' clothing stores ···· ···· ······ 50 Shoe stores ...... .... 54 Women's ready-tcrwear stores .. . 100 Other apparel stores .. 27 Drugstores ... ..........149 -5 Eating and drinking placest . . . . ...... . . 133 -9 Restaurants .... .. .... 87 Food storest ...........244 -6 Groceries (without meats) ····· ····· ··· 70 Groceries (with meats) 161 Gasoline and service stations ........... . 997 -3 ~neral-merchandise storest .... .. . . .. . ..232 -9 Full-line stores . . . . ..126 Dry-goods stores .... . 55 Department stores .... 51 Other retail storest ....244 Florists ···· ···· ······ 42 Nurseries ··· ·· ·· ····· 17 Jewelry stores .. .. .. . 35 Liquor stores ··· ···· · 28 Office-, store-, and school- supply dealers ...... 34 -3 2 8 -4 2 8 -12 10 -13 11 -6 19 35 -18 -12 15 4 12 11 -6 25 42 -15 -16 -25 -17 -14 -4 -10 5 9 -28 10 12 -6 7 -3 -2 -5 -4 -1 -13 5 -5 -5 -2 -6 -13 -8 -6 11 10 -18 4 10 -5 4 8 19 11 19 36 4 7 11 -11 14 10 -1 7 • Percent change of current month from preceding month's seasonal ave.rage. t Includes kinds of busineas other than classifications listed. •• Cha!llle is less than one_hMf Qf L="cent.-------­ INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION, TEXAS• l ndH Ad~atfHI /o, Seasonal Ve,iation-IJS1·IJS9 • IOO ployment rate has averaged below 3 percent. The indus­trial breakdown of the state's employment gains reveals that the most important sources of employment growth in Texas over the past year were state and local govern­ment, contract construction, services, trade, and manu­facturing. Manufacturing industries showing the largest increases included oil-field machinery and other nonelec­trical machinery, aircraft and other transportation equip­ment, food products, and apparel. Retail trade was one of the components of Texas busi­ness activity that decreased during February. The decrease revealed in unadjusted sales data (-6 percent) was re­peated in data adjusted for normal seasonal trends (-2 percent). The types of retail stores which showed the sharpest seasonally adjusted declines from January to February included two of the classes that typically are most affected by rising interest rates and declining homebuilding demands. These are the lumber, building­material, and hardware dealers and the furniture and household-appliance stores. The easing of retail sales in Texas during February was part of a national pattern, and national surveys of consumer buying plans conducted during January indicate a scaling down of plans for future purchases of such major items as houses and new auto­mobiles. Retail prices in Texas and throughout the nation have been rising at an average annual rate of about 4 percent to 5 percent during the past year as a consequence of the rapid growth in economic demands, but high government spokesmen in such agencies as the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Federal Reserve System have recently held out the hope that the pace of inflation might begin to slow before the end of 1969. :Although living costs have been rising, government studies show that costs in Texas are well below those in other parts of the nation. In the latest report on comparative living costs (as of spring 1967), Austin, Texas, had the lowest costs of all the cities studied. For a "moderate" budget, the cost of living in Austin was $7,952 per year. In Houston, which had one of the lowest costs of all major metropolitan areas, the cor­responding cost was $8,301. The highest cost in the con­tinental United States was $9,977 in New York City. General business-activity gains in Texas have been widely distributed throughout the state, but two cities have shown annual gains well in excess of the state aver­age. During the first two months of 1969 the business­activity inde.x for Austin registered a year-to-year gain of 43 percent and the index for Dallas was up 29 percent, compared with the state increase of 17 percent. Only three of the twenty Texas cities for which business-activity in­dexes are computed showed year-to-year declines in ac­tivity during this period. Although the pace of business in Texas and the nation has slowed some recently, activity remains at a very high level. The predictions of business forecasters appear to have become more divergent during the past few months, but the dominant view now seems to be that the prospect of a serious downturn in business before mid-year is in­creasingly unlikely and that any significant slowdown, should one occur during 1969, would be more likely to hap­pen later in the year. Key factors counted upon to provide support to the economy over the near future are the indi­ cations of continued high levels of business investment and government spending. 103 THE FUTURE SUPPLY OF OIL PART ONE: THE PATTERN OF THE PRESENT Robert M. Lockwood* Although crude oil has been produced commercially for more than a century, significant attempts to define the volume of oil in the earth's crust began only about twenty years ago. One excellent reason for the tardiness of these efforts was simply the lack of significant or reliable quantitative data on which to base any sort of disciplined speculation. Not until the late thirlies and the forties, for example, did reliable estimates of "proved reserves" of crude oil begin to be published in a few countries. Even now the accuracy and comprehensiveness of published oil and gas statistics are seldom what one might desire. Considerable effort toward their refinement, however, has been initiated in recent years. So long as these and other available data are used cautiously one should be able to define at least the rough limits of this question and perhaps assess those efforts already made to provide specific estimates of un­discovered oil. Certain of the broad upper and lower limits within which the total crude-oil endowment must fall can be established easily. The circumstances which control the occurrence of both liquid and gaseous petroleum can be classified as geologic, geographic, technologic, and eco­nomic. The most general of these circumstances affects the nature and the extent of the habitat of oil. Almost with­out exception significant accumulations of oil occur in the rocks formed from thick organic sediments laid down in the basins of ancient inland or marginal seas, much like the present Persian Gulf. Unlike coal and lignite, which are the products of rare circumstances, oil is a normal constituent of sedimentary rocks which have not been unduly disturbed or altered. Among liquids only water is more common than crude oil. The most fundamental requisite for a commercial ac­cumulation of crude oil, therefore, is a sedimentary basin containing fairly thick, undisturbed sediments. As Table 1 illustrates, these basins (excluding the ocean floors sea­ward of 1,000-foot water depths) comprise perhaps one eighth of the surface of the earth. Of their estimated ex­tent of 24.5 million square miles, only about two thirds ( 16-17 million square miles) is considered to be suffi­ciently promising for petroleum exploration. About a quarter of the total and one ninth of the effective sedi­mentary basin area consists of the submarine lands at the margins of the continents. At least 90 percent of the surface of the earth (exclud­ ing the deep sea floor), all but 17 million square miles, can be considered to offer no real promise of oil and gas. The volume of favorable sediments may amount to some 25 million cubic miles. The sedimentary basins of the United States, inclusive of Alaska and the continental shelf to the 1,000-foot contour, amount to some 3 million square miles 800 000 of which are offshore. The favorable basin area has been *Mr. Lockwood is a research associate with the Bureau of Business Research at The University of Texas at Austin. estimated at 2.3 million square miles and the effective sedimentary volume at about 4 million cubic miles. Shoreward of the 1,000-foot contour in the Gulf of Mexico the total area of Texas and its adjacent shelf ap­proaches 300,000 square miles (Table 2). The total sedi­mentary area comes to about 290,000 square miles, of which some 260,000 are on land. The favorable sedimen­tary area totals 270,000 square miles, and the effective volume of sedimentary rock must amount to at least 800,000 cubic miles-20 percent of the comparable figure for the entire United States. Discussions of the volume of sedimentary basins require consideration of the vertical as well as the areal, or hori­zontal, dimension of oil occurrence. Even today sediments deeper than 15,000 feet are little known and scarcely explored. The favorable volume of sedimentary rock deeper than 15,000 feet has been estimated for this study at 2.2 mil­lion cubic miles-8.8 percent of the world total (Tables 1 and 2). A third of this quantity is estimated to underlie the United States, with some 350,000 cubic miles under Texas alone. A geologist has estimated that the U.S. Gulf province, onshore and offshore, contains 25 percent of the Tnble 1 EST1'1ATED TOTAL AREAS AND 8EDIMENfARY AREAS AND VOi "Mr~ • • NITF -\TF.S Total world United States1 Below Below 15,000 16,000 Classification Total feet Total feet World Total area (square miles) .....197,000 3,600 Land and inland water 57,500 Oceans and seas ..............139,500 1,000 Continental shelf' only .. ... 10,500 1,000 Other than continental shelf 129,000 Total sedimentary basin Area (square miles) ...... .... 24,500 3,000 ······· 2,200 Land and inland water ..... 18,500 Continental shelf' 6,000 800 ·········· Volume (cubic miles) . . . . . . . . . 35,000 2,500 5,000 1,000 Land and inland water ..... 25,000 1,500 3,00o 40o Continental shelf' .......... 10,000 1,000 2,000 600 Effective sedimentary basin Area (square miles) .. . . . . . . . . 16,800 2,250 1,750 Land and inland water ..... 15,000 500 Continental shelf' 1,800 ··· ······· 2,200 4,000 750Volume (cubic miles) 25,000 ········· Land and inland water ..... 21,000 1,400 2,600 260 1,400 500 Continental shelf' 4,000 800 ······ ···· 1 Including Alaska and excluding Hawaii. • To a water depth of 1,000 feet. :M 1 Sources: Based in part on data in Lewis G. Weeks, "lndustrY(J::.Look to the Continental Shelves," Oil and G4B Jou"!"'l• ~3 de." 21, 1965). 127-134, 138; Ira A. Cram, "Deep Hunting r;.':! 47 Bulletin of the Americ4n Association of Petroleum GCeoloD il 'Pe· (December 1963), 2009-2014; National Petroleum oune S5-&3. troleum Productive Cap4cit11 (Washington, I?.C., 1952)k PP· d Wal­in addition to several of the papers of Lewis G. Wee 8 aN tional lace E. Pratt, as well as various other publicat.io~s of }hePet~leuJll Petroleum Council and the American Assoc1attc:>n oh d ta are Geologists, Oil ""d Gna Journ4l, and World Oil. T e a partly estimated. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW entire world's volume of the prospective deep-oil hunting grounds lying between the depths of 15,000 and 30,000 feet. He further calculates that the province-largely Texas and Louisiana-includes more than 30 percent of the world's prospective deep grounds at all depths. Drilling technology already has progressed to the point at which drilling to 40,000 or even 50,000 feet is techni­cally feasible (Figure 1). That commercial (as distin­guished from scientific) drilling probably will not soon attain such depths is attributable largely to economics. Certain technological questions, however, can be resolved only by the experience of extremely deep drilling itself. Petroleum is vulnerable to high pressure and tempera­ture. With increasing reservoir depth occurs a transitional zone in which crude oil and natural gas give way finally to gas alone. The extreme variety of local conditions makes it impossible to assign universal values to the depths at which petroleum production becomes economically, if not physically, infeasible. Deep drilling in South Louisiana has raised the possi­ bility of an exception to the theoretical disappearance at great depth of the heavier liquid phase of petroleum. The deepest oil production has been found on the flanks of salt domes, the sort of occurrence which revived the old Spin­ dletop field many years ago and which is common on the Texas-Louisiana Gulf coast. Even if the deeper reservoir rocks contain gas alone, the great pressure and elevated temperature associated with these regions will insure a greater volume of gas per unit volume of reservoir rock. One of the most valuable contributions of technologic progress to the supply of oil has been the remarkable in­ crease in the recovery factor-the percentage represent­ ing that portion of oil discovered which is physically and economically recoverable. The average rate of recovery has increased since 1945 in annual increments of 0.33-0.5 percentage points, to its present estimated rate of about 36 percent. Of the 280 billion barrels of crude oil now estimated (by the American Petroleum Institute) to have been discov­ Tab.e 2 E TIMATED TOTAL AREA A 'D EFFECTIVE SEDIMF 'TARY BA:Sl . ARFA A 'D \ OLl ME l'. "ITFD STATFS A.·o TEXAS I s United States Te..xas Conter-Below Below minous 15,000 15,000 Classification states Alaska Total feet Total feet Total area (square miles) 3,350 1.250 4,600 ... 300 ... Land and inland water ....3.000 600 3,600 . .. 270 ... Continental shelf 350 650 1,000 ... 30 ... ········ ·· Eirective sedimentary basin Area .. .. .... . .. .. .........1,800 450 2,250 ... 270 ... Land and inland water . . 1,570 180 1,750 ... 240 ... Continental shelf .. ...... 230 270 500 ... 30 ... Volume (cubic miles) ..... . 3,200 800 4,000 750 800 350 Land and inland water ...2,200 400 2,600 300 600 230 Continental shelf" . . . . . ...1,000 400 1,400 450 200 120 1 Including Alaska but excluding Hawaii. 2 To a water de1Jth of 1.000 feet. Sources : See Table 1. ered in the United States by the end of 1945, 20-30 billion barrels more can be expected to be recovered than could have been anticipated in 1945. Of each 100 billion barrels discovered since 1945, 7-11 billion barrels of recoverable oil can be attributed to technologic advances alone. To put the case a little differently: the total discoveries of crude oil can fall off 0.9-1.4 percent annually and still yield, on the average, the same quantity of recoverable oil. This trend is expected to continue through the seventies and to elevate the present average of 36 percent to at least 50-60 percent. If 400-500 billion barrels of crude oil originally occupied the reservoirs so far discovered in the United States, the continuing developments in drilling and producing technology should add 1.3-2.5 billion barrels of crude oil annually, through the seventies, to the recover­able portion of that crude oil already found in the United States. If roughly 150 billion barrels of crude oil have been discovered in Texas through 1967, the technological aug­mentation of the presently recoverable portion of this oil should amount to 500-750 million barrels per year. The great value of this increment of supply is its effect on oil already discovered. Like the upward "paper" revi­sions of the estimated primary reserves in known fields, this element of supply does not depend on wildcat drilling. Crude oil from new fields, however, can be added effec­tively to the supply only by the drill. RECORD DRILLING DEPTHS. U~ITED STATES Depth 1898-1967 Depth (thousands of feet) {tho1,11ond1 of feet) 0 .5 .10 .15 .15 -20 .20 .25 .JO 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 Another invaluable contribution of technology, espe­cially considering the growing disparity between the price and the replacement cost of crude oil, is its effect in reducing the cost of finding and producing oil. The National Petroleum Council recently estimated that tech­nology alone, during the past fifteen years, may have reduced the cost of finding and lifting oil by as much as $1.00 per barrel. The Council attributes a saving of about 35 cents to better drilling techniques, 32 cents to improved production methods, 17.5-35 cents to wider well spacing (with consequently fewer wells), and 9 cents to more effective corrosion control. In addition to the limits imposed on petroleum occur­rence by geology and geography, by depth and technol­ogy, economic influences are the final arbiters always and everywhere. The effect of economics on the supply of oil and gas is easily demonstrated by consideration of the absolute supply of petroleum. Information about the absolute quantities of crude oil and natural gas in the earth's crust would be more mean­ingful than similar data for most other earth resources. Even though it may occur in several physical forms, APRIL 1969 petroleum is not difficult to define. No problems exist comparable to those related to ore-grading, for example. Each crude oil is chemically unique, but almost all crudes can be used as refinery feedstocks. So long as they are not too viscous to flow properly, all crude oils can be extracted and used similarly, even though certain "im­ purities" (if these properly can be said to exist) may cause some crudes to be more expensive to refine than others. On the other hand, similar "impurities"-actually variations in composition-have made commercially feas­ ible the extraction of sulfur and helium from many natural gases. Heavy oil sands ("tar sands") and bituminous sediments (oil shales), however, are like ordinary minerals in that the recoverable yield of crude oil, in barrels per ton of material handled, may be so low as to make certain oc­currences economically worthless in the foreseeable future. Another aspect of "synthetic" crude oils is extremely significant economically, though less so now than in the future. Most of the liquid petroleum which can be pro­duced synthetically is relatively deficient in hydrogen. The heat value of these oils is therefore lower, and they are more expensive to produce per unit of energy poten­tial. Once an occurrence of crude oil or natural gas has been located by drilling, the only economic question is one of relative magnitude, and not of "purity." An imaginary oil field discovered at a depth of 12,000 feet might contain an estimated 375 million barrels of crude oil. Geologic and technologic circumstances might indicate an average re­covery factor, over the life of the field, of about 40 per­cent, or 150 million barrels. Located 100 miles from Chicago, such a field would represent a great find. Fifty miles offshore in the Persian Gulf, the field would be abandoned as far too small to justify the cost of development. In the Antarctic, where half to three quarters of the 12,000 feet would have to be drilled through the ice sheet amid staggering logistical problems and capital expenditures, a 150-million-barrel field would represent a geological curiosity. In the same fashion, a general and fairly long-term movement upward or downward in the price of crude oil tends to make available or unavailable some increment of discovered, physically producible crude oil. Another way of looking at this phenomenon is to consider that the floor of commercial accumulation is lowered or raised. In one set of circumstances, allowing for time and space, an oil field in the United States which promises to yield at least 5 million barrels might be commercial. An increase in the price of crude oil might lower this floor to 3 mil­lion barrels. On the other hand, a decrease in price might raise the ceiling to 10 million barrels. In theory, at least, a sufficiently general and long-term rise in the price of crude oil will bring back into produc­tion a certain number of fields abandoned during or after development. Similarly, a definite fall in the price of crude will cause some additional increment of new discoveries to be abandoned as noncommercial and some portion of pres­ent production to be discontinued as e~onomically un­ justified. The isolated effect of the price of crude oil never can be determined fully, because the other variables involved will not cooperate by remaining fixed for a while. Nonethe­less, price exerts some influence, alone or in combination with other circumstances, and its rise or fall effectively increases or decreases a commercially available supply of discovered and undiscovered oil. The elements of even the ultimate supply of crude oil and natural gas always must be considered in relation to time, space, and economics. Statements concerning the supply of any finite economic substance are always eco­nomic statements, even though they may be disguised as physical inventories. That the commodity came to be in­ventoried at all is the clearest expression of its economic potential. Table 3 SUGGESTED CLASSIFICATION1 OF CRUDE OIL ORIGINALLY CONTAINED IN THE EARTH'S CRUST 1 Discovered oil 2 Recoverable 3 Currently recoverable 4 Physically producible 5 Physically and economically producible 6 Eventually recoverable 7 Physically producible 8 Physically and economically producible 9 Not recoverable 10 Undiscovered oil 11 Recoverable 12 Currently recoverable 13 Physically producible 14 Physically and economically producible 15 Eventually recoverable 16 Physically producible 17 Physically and economically producible 18 Not recoverable 1 Except for those on Lines 9 and 18, each of these categories of crude-oil resources also can be cross-classified as primary or secondary, depending on the actual or a nticipated method of production. Data on secondary production or reserves frequently distinguish between fluid (gas or water) injection and other methoda of secondary recovery. The ultimate supply of crude oil consists of two ele­ments-the discovered and the undiscovered. The following classification of the ultimate supply, though not the only one possible, at least possesses the merit of mutually exclusive categories. The "primary" component of Table 3 (Line 1) could be further divided into "proved" (developed and undevel­oped), "probable," and "possible." These breakdowns, how· ever, vary widely with individual judgment and essentially lack meaning except, perhaps, within a single company. With the limits of the occurrence and production of oil sketched in, one can proceed to document the past. The idealized events and circumstances of economics can refer only to the past or the future. Because the data generated by the operations of the oil industry today are not im· mediately available for study, the present is effectively eliminated and becomes simply the most recent past. No one yet has found a way to discover oil, to prove its presence, and to produce it, except by drilling. In the United States about 2.1 million holes have been drilled in search of oil (Table 4). These holes aggregated some 6.5 billion feet. Three of every ten of these wells were dry, and these undoubtedly accounted for more than their share of the footage-say, conservatively, 2 billion feet. The distribution of this drilling, in both space and time, has been extremely uneven. During the nineteen years 1949-1967, for example, 41 percent of the holes and 55 percent of the footage were drilled. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW The geographic imbalance is equally striking. Beginning in 1867, the oil industry in Texas has put down some 558,000 holes totaling perhaps 2,200 million feet. These totals comprise 27 percent of the number and 34 percent of the footage of all of the oil drilling done in the United States in 109 years. Texas includes only 6.5 percent of the total area (including the continental shelf), and 12 per­cent of the effective sedimentary basin area of the United States (Table 2). At the other extreme lies Alaska, with 27 percent of the total area (including the continental shelf) and 20 percent of the effective sedimentary basin area of the United States. In about seventy years, only 430 wells have been drilled in Alaska, aggregating some 3.4 million feet. Obviously, none of these data individually means very much. To analyze them overall, however, one must gain some idea of the quantity of oil discovered in the United States and other regions. According to the studies of the Interstate Oil Compact Commission, about 109 billion barrels of crude oil were discovered in the United States between the beginning of 1956 and the beginning of 1966 (Table 5). Of this quan­tity, 58 percent, or 63 billion barrels, can be produced with present methods (if not under present economic conditions). During the same decade Texas did not fare so well. Although the estimated oil content of the known reser­voirs increased by 26.6 billion barrels, the net change in the quantity of recoverable oil amounted to only 6.8 billion barrels, an effective recovery rate of 26 percent. Because production during this period outstripped dis­coveries, primary reserves declined by 700 million barrels. The net decline of secondary reserves, estimated at 2.2 billion barrels, was attributable to both categories of secondary reserves. The currently economic reserves, largely in fluid-injection projects, declined by about 10 percent (500 million barrels), apparently because the gross drawdown of production was not offset by the initiation of significant new projects. Because they proved to be unduly optimistic, the reserves attributable to thermal and other recovery methods not currently economical were revised downward by 1.7 billion barrels. In 1960, the year in which the IOCC first included reserves at­tributable to recovery methods other than fluid injection, this category in Texas had been estimated at 16 billion barrels, 6.2 billion barrels higher than the estimate for January 1, 1966. Table 4 I G I TES ANr United States Texas Number of holes Number of holes Total Dry Footage Total Dry Footage Years I thousands) (millions) (thousands) (millions) 1859-1928' 777 163 1.297 81 26 168 1929-ln8 200 51 683 n 24 333 1939-1948 261 76 939 81 24 339 1949-1958 482 182 800 1,954 180 64 1959-1~67 373 149 1.658 119 44 555 Total 2,093 621 558 6,531 182 2,195 1 Excluding service wells. ' Partly estimated. Drilling in Texas began in 1867. Sources: Ralph Arnold and William J. Kennitzer, Petroleum in the U,ited States and Possessions (New York, 1931) ; annual statis­tics in Oil and Gas Journal and lVorld Oil, various years. T hie 5 EST1'1ATED TOTAL DISCOVERIES OF CRl DE OIL l NITED STATES AND TEXAS AS OF JA 'UAR'\: 1 SELE( TED \EARS 19"6 ~66 (Bt Classification 1956 1958 19601 19621 19661 United States Original oil content of reservoirs . .. .295.4 315.7 334.3 352.1 404.4 Estimated ultimate recovery ......127.1 136.0 152.7 156.0 190.0 Indicated recovery factor (percent) .. 43.0 43.1 45.7 44.3 47.0 Cumulative production · 52.6 57.8 62.9 68.1 17.1 ········· Reserves 74.5 78.2 89.8 87.9 Primary, proved ··· ···· ············· ··· 110.9 29.7 30.6 31.0 31.4 31.7 Secondary . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 44.8 47.6 58.8 56.5 79.2 Economically recoverable ... 12.0 13.1 14.8 16.3 17.7 Physically recoverable only1 ..32.8 34.5 44.0 40.2 61.5 ·············· Texas Original oil content of reservoirs ... . 106.7 111.2 117.8 123.6 133.3 Estimated ultimate recovery ...... 51.l 51.5 59.6 56.6 57.9 Indicated recovery factor (percent) .. 47.9 46.3 50.6 45.8 43.4 Cumulative production . . .. . . . . . . . 19.0 21.2 23.1 25.0 28.7 Reserves 32.1 36.5 ·· ········ 30.3 31.6 ·············· 29.2 Primary, proved 15.6 15.2 15.5 15.5 14.9 ·············· Secondary . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . 16.5 15.1 21.0 16.1 14.3 Economicaliy recoverable ..... 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 4.5 Physically recoverable only1 .. 11.5 10.2 16.0 11.1 9.8 1 Beginning with the estimates for January 1, 1960, the Interstate Oil Company Commission began to estimate quantities of crude oil which are physically recoverable by the application of thermal recovery, solvent extraction, and otOOr newer techniques of second­ary recovery. The earlier estimates considered only primary methcxls and the conventional, fluid·injection techniques of second­ ary recovery. Sources: Paul D. Torrey, "'Evaluation of United States Oil Resources as of January 1, 1956," Oil and Gas Compact Bulletin, 15 (June 1956), 19-21 ; Torrey, "Evaluation of United States Oil Reserves as of January l, 1958," Oil and Gas Compact Bulletin, 17 (June 1958). 15-17; Torrey, " Evaluation of United States Oil Resources as of January 1, 1960," Oil and Gas Compact Bulletin, 19 (June 1960), 41-52; Torrey, " Evaluation of United States Oil Resources as of January 1, 1962," Oil and Gas Compact Bulletin, 21 (June 1962), 15-29; Torrey, "Evaluation of United States Oil Resources as of January 1, 1966," Oil and Gas Compact Bulletin, 25 (Decem­ber 1966), 22-41. For the Interstate Oil Compact Commission, Paul D. Torrey has compiled for several years the estimates which form the basis of Table 5. With some associates, Torrey extended this coverage to the entire world in a paper delivered to the Sixth World Petroleum Congress in 1963. Table 6 presents some of Torrey's data, as of January 1, 1962, together with an extremely crude effort to update some of them to January 1, 1968. This arithmetic, especially for 1968, should not be taken too seriously. Most of these numbers can be neither proved nor disproved. An examination of estimates of total ulti­mate discoveries, however, will reveal that the Table 6 guesses as to the magnitude of discoveries so far are noticeably-sometimes ridiculously-conservative. The figures for original oil content of known reservoirs are probably the most significant numbers in the table. The 1968 figure for the United States, 425 billion barrels of crude discovered, is unlikely to be more than 10 per­cent too high or low. An error of plus or minus 10 percent, implying a range of 123-150 billion barrels discovered, probably also defines the limitations of the estimate for Texas of 135 billion barrels in 1968. The average recovery factor (as of January 1, 1968) for both Texas and the United States probably fell in the APRIL 1969 107 range of 40-50 percent. Given the acceptable range of estimated total discoveries for Texas and the United States (123-150 and 386-472 billion barrels) an ultimate recovery factor of 40 percent is almost certainly too low. In the case of Texas 40 percent of 123 billion barrels would yield 49 billion barrels, of which 31 billion already have been produced. Of the remaining 18 billion, primary reserves account for 13-15 billion leaving a total of only 3-5 billion barrels to cover both physically and economi­cally producible secondary reserves. The economically producible secondary reserves alone must account for 4 billion, certainly 3 billion barrels (Table 5). The most pessimistic outlook for secondary reserves attributable to thermal and other methods of recovery would not reduce this figure to zero, even if the 11 billion barrels allowed in Table 6 is much too high. An average recovery factor of 45-50 percent applied to 123-150 billion barrels yields a recoverable range of 55-75 billion barrels. Reducing these quantities by the amount already produced, by 13-15 billion barrels of primary re­serves, and by 4 billion barrels of economically producible secondary reserves leaves a quantity of 5-27 billion barrels to represent physically producible secondary reserves. The higher of these figures is almost certainly too high, considering present technology. If the range of technically producible secondary reserves is set at, say, 7-12 billion barrels, a recoverable total of 55-62 billion barrels is implied. The indicated recovery fac;;or there­fore would range between 36.7 and 50.4 percent, which is about right. An ultimate recovery of 40 percent of 425 billion barrels throughout the United States would,. mean 170 billion producible barrels. This number, coincidentally, is pre­cisely the figure favored by the most pessimistic of those who have predicted ultimately recoverable oil from past and future discoveries. If the crude oil so far discovered in the United States is considered to range between 383 and 468 billion barrels IMATE lD l ED •HAT D 1 January 1, 1962 January 1, 1968 United United It.em World States Texas World States Texas Original oil content or reservoirs1 ......1,605 352 124 2,500 425 135 Estimated ultimat.e recovery 156 57 1,300 210 60 Indicat~d recovery factor (percent) 44.3 46.0 52.0 49.4 44.5 Cumulative production .... 1312 68 25 197 85 31 Reserves 88 32 1,103 125 29 Primary 297 ~1 16 453 31 14 Secondary 2 57 16 650 94 15 1 The figures for January 1, 1962, differ slight:y from those in the original source. An inadvertent omission from Texas (and there­fore from the United States and th:') world) was corrected and explained in the data for January l, 1966. 2 Not estimated in the original source. Sources: For January 1, 1962: Paul D. Torrey, C. L. Moore, and George H. Weber, "World Oil Resources," Section VIII: Statistics and Education, Proceedings of the Sixth World Petroleum Con­gress (Hamburg, 1963), pp. 83-114; Torrey, "Evaluation of United States Oil Resources as of January 1, 1966," Oil and Gas Compact Bulletin, 25 (December 1966), 22-41. For January l, 1968: Based partly on the IOCC series for the United States and Texas (see sources for Tabe 5), partly on published material in the Oil and Gas Journal and many similar sources, and partly on independent estimates. 108 ( 425 plus or minus 10 percent), a 40-percent recovery factor applied to these extremes would yield 153-187 bil­lion barrels. Subtracting past production, primary l'&o serves, and 18-20 billion barrels for economically produc­ible secondary reserves leaves only 17-53 billion barrels for technically feasible reserves. But the IOCC estimate for this category of reserves as of January 1, 1966, was already 62 billion barrels. Suppose the range within which technologically avail­able secondary reserves should fall is established at 65-85 billion barrels. Addition of this quantity to the economic secondary reserves, primary reserves, and cumulative production yields an estimated range of 199-221 billion barrels of recoverable oil. Using the range 383-468 billion barrels to represent total discoveries, the indicated aver­age recovery factor is 42.5-57.7 percent, which appean reasonable. Not much can be said to defend the 1968 figures for the entire world. They look fairly reasonable, however, when considered without the component of the United States. Exclusive of the United States, the estimated total dis· coveries amount to 2,075 billion barrels, of which 52.5 percent, or 1,090 billion barrels, is estimated to be techni· cally recoverable. In any comparison the quite different development his­tory of the world outside the United States should be em­phasized. With the possible exceptions of the Soviet Union and Venezuela, all of the most prolific oil regions -the Middle East, North Africa-have been developed under nearly ideal circumstances. They have experienced no wide-open production, no excessive drilling, and-until recent years-no competition. One of the ironies of eco­nomic history is bound up in the fact that, of all countries with large oil resources, only the United States possessed exactly the combination of legal, economic, and social circumstances which made possible the overnight estab­lishment of a large oil industry in the middle of the nine· teenth century. These precise circumstances no longer exist, however, and they recede every day further into the past. Regardless of whether the data in Table 6 are correct, the difference between having produced one fifth of the oil discovered in a region (as in the United States) and one ninth of the oil discovered in another region (as in the world outside the United States) is profound. The 20 percent and the 11 percent may not be quite correct, but the two figures, whatever they are, certainly must differ greatly. Furthermore, a significant portion of the oil already consumed in the United States was produced under circumstances which make it impossible or ex· tremely expensive ever to recover as much oil from some of the older reservoirs as can be got eventually out of the oldest reservoirs in most other countries. All of this pencil-sharpening is in aid of a single task: the development of a reasonable figure to represent the quantity of crude oil already discovered. As surprising and frustrating as it seems, less effort has been devoted to this endeavor than to the presumably more exciting exercise of guessing how much undiscovered oil is in the earth. Although the total discoveries would appear to be a much more useful number, only the IOCC-and recently, the API-has initiated such a series. Through l~ck of co­operation the IOCC was compelled to abandon its enter· prise following the estimates for the beginning of 1966. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW As they have been qualified by discussion, the figures representing total discoveries of crude oil (Table 6) will be used in this study as points of reference for certain aspects of both the past and the future. To establish some measure of the success of explora­tion, students of the petroleum industry frequently divide the number of holes, or the footage drilled, into figures representing "estimated proved reserves," for example, such as the AP! series. Such an exercise demonstrates very little, except for long division. The one figure af­fected by nothing but drilling and the circumstances of oil occurrence is that representing the original oil con­tent of known reservoirs-total discoveries. The next most useful figure is that indicating anticipated recovery. Even this number, however, is subject to revision by technology, economics, and a great many other influences besides drilling and the circumstances of oil occurrence. Although the figures for total discoveries almost cer­ tainly are incorrect, they at least define a theoretical maximum. If it could be determined that precisely 425 billion barrels of crude oil actually had been found in the United States hy January 1, 1968, then the anticipated recovery as of that date, even if it attained 100 percent, never could exceed 425 billion barrels. A little more than 200,000 barrels of crude oil have been discovered for every hole drilled in the United States -about 242,000 in Texas, and 189,000 outside Texas. In illustration of the meaninglessness of these averages over such large areas, however, the comparable figure for Alaska is at least 4.7 million barrels per hole. Even this huge figure probably increased last year by 6-21 times. An immense discovery on the Arctic Slope, at least as large as East Texas, may amount to as much as 40 billion barrels of oil in place, depending upon the recovery factor used to obtain the published estimate of 5-10 billion barrels of recoverable oil. The average in Alaska, itself a very large area, therefore may amount to some 27-95 million barrels per hole--possibly 500 times the average for the United States. The data for other extreme cases, such as Louisiana and Florida, also would differ consider­ably from the national average. About 65 barrels per foot of hole drilled have been found in the United States as a whole. The comparable figures are: Texas, 61 ; the country outside Texas, 67; Alaska, 577 (or now, perhaps, 3,000-10,600); and the coun­try outside both states, 66 barrels per foot. Because historical data on exploration drilling are so few, a geologist once suggested that the total number of dry holes offers a useful index of exploration effort. The validity of this indicator depends upon the fact that the proportion of dry exploratory holes is nine or ten times that of dry development holes. Given enough space and time, therefore, most dry holes usually are exploratory holes. Some 685,000 barrels of crude oil have been discovered for every recorded dry hole in the United States, compared to 742,000 barrels in Texas and 662,000 barrels outside Texas. Exclusive of Alaska and Texas, the average for the nation is 188,000 barrels. Alaska has found 8.4 million barrels per dry hole, possibly increased by the Prudhoe Bay discovery last year to from 500 to 1,750 million barrels. With exploration footage alone, 292 barrels per foot have been found throughout the country, four and one­ half times the comparable figure for total footage. Esti­ mates of cumulative exploratory footage unfortunately do not exist for areas within the United States. About 189,000 barrels of crude oil have been found per square mile of effective sedimentary basin in the United States and about 106,000 barrels per cubic mile. The same figures for Texas are 500,000 and 169,000 barrels, respectively, and for Alaska, 4,400 and 2,500 barrels (by now 27,000-93,000 and 15,000-53,000 barrels). Some conception of the drilling effort per unit of sedi­ mentary basin which has been expended in the search for petroleum can be gained from Table 7. Throughout the sedimentary basins of the United States, including Alaska, rable 7 LAT! Favorable sedimentary basin Area Volume Region Number of holes (thousands) Area (thous. sq. mi.} Square miles per hole Footage (thousands) Volume (thous. cu. mi.) Feet per cu. mi. Texas Total holes ........... . ..•..•....•....... · · · · · · · · · · 558 270 0.48 Dry holes .. ... ... . . . .....• . ·• · · · · • · · · · · · · · · • · · · · · · · 182 270 1.48 Tota1 footage . . . .. .•..•....•......... · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Alaska' Total holes ............ . ... . . . ..... · . · · · · · · • · · · · • · · Dry holes ....... .............. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 0.4 0.2 450 450 10,465 18,828 Total footage ....... . ........... · • · · · · · · · · · · · · · · • · · United States, excluding Texas ... .......•..... · · · · .. · Total holes ......... . ..........•..•... · · · • · · · · · · · · · Dry holes .................. . ... . · · · · · · · · · • · · · · · · · · · 1,535 439 1,980 1,980 1.29 4.51 Total footage ... ....................• · · · · · · · · · · · · · · United States, excluding Texas and Alaska Total holes ............ .... .. .. . • . . . .•.. .. •...... • · Dry holes . ......... ... .. .. ..... • · ·. · · · · • · · · · · · · · • · · 1,535 439 1,530 1,530 1.00 3.49 Total holes . . ........... ... .... • · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Total United States Total holes .. .. . .. .. .•.. •. .... . .. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Dry holes . ..............•....... · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 2,093 621 2,250 2,250 1.08 3.62 Total footage . .. . .. ................... · · · · · · · · · · · · · 2,195 3.5 4,336 800 300 3,200 2,744 4.33 1,355 4,333 6,531 2,400 4,000 1,805 1,633 Figures actually used for Alaska were: total holes, 430 ; dry holes, 239 ; total footage, 3,465,000. These figures were derived from same sources as those in Table 4. Sources: Tables 2 and 4. APRIL 1969 a hole has been drilled for every 1.08 square miles of favorable area-roughly one hole per 690 acres. The dry­hole spacing, on the average, has run to about 2,300 acres (3.62 square miles). In holes of all kinds, excluding service wells, an average of more than 1,600 feet has been drilled for every cubic mile of favorable sedimentary volume. These averages, as usual, disguise some violent ex­tremes. The well spacing in Texas has averaged about 310 and 950 acres, respectively, and some 2,750 feet have been drilled into each cubic mile of favorable basin sedi­ments. All of these numbers have been distorted con­siderably by the nearly 30,000 wells drilled in the East Texas field. The omission of wells drilled in this field might decrease the average total drilling density, for example, to about one hole per 325 acres. Even the favorable basin area in Alaska can count only one hole to every 10,500 square miles and one dry hole to every 18,800 square miles. These figures are de­pressed far below what they ought to be by the fact that most of the drilling in Alaska has occurred in Cook Inlet, a relatively small area. The average of 4.33 feet drilled per cubic mile of favorable basin is incredibly low, but the exclusion of Cook Inlet activity probably would reduce this average to less than a foot. An estimated 1,550 million feet have been drilled in exploratory holes in the United States. Divided by the favorable sedimentary basin volume, this footage yields a national average of only 388 feet per cubic mile. If the figures were available they would indicate that the aver­ages for Texas, Louisiana, California, and several other states would be much higher. But for many areas within these and other states, the average would be considerably lower. That even an amount of recoverable oil equal to that already produced (85 tillion barrels) could be dis­covered with so little exploratory drilling per unit volume of sediments is remarkable. This fact alone encourages an optimistic estimate of the quantity of undiscovered oil in the United States. Because the total drilling figures for the entire world are unknown, no one knows what proportion of all drill­ing has been done in the United States. The fraction could scarcely be less than 75 percent and probably is higher. Yet the conclusion is inescapable that the United States is considerably underexplored. Not all drilling footage, not even all exploratory footage, is equal. Some of it is more valuable than the rest in terms of the knowledge it yields and the prospe(!tive territory it proves or elimi­nates. These facts are apparent in the trend and the implica­tions of deep-well completions, wells drilled to a total depth of at least 15,000 feet. The first such hole was drilled in California just thirty years ago. Of the total of 3,412 drilled through 1967, five sixths have been sunk during the past ten years. These 15,000-foot-plus holes represent less than 0.2 per­cent of the number and 0.8 percent of the footage of all of the holes drilled in the United States. More to the point, only that portion of these holes below 15,000 feet actually has penetrated the deeper, little-known portion of sedimentary basins. Given the average depth per hole of about 16,500 feet, the hole made below 15,000 feet totals only about 5 million feet. Of the perhaps 4 million cubic miles of effective sedi­mentary volume underlying the United States, 18-19 per­cent (750,000 cubic miles), conservatively, may lie below 15,000 feet. A total of 5 million feet drilled into thae sediments scarcely constitutes exhaustive exploration. If these numbers are about right, an average of lea than 7 linear feet per cubic mile has been drilled into the rocks deeper than 15,000 feet. In comparison, the 3.26 million cubic miles of sedimentary rock lying above 16,000 feet has been penetrated by 6.5 billion feet of drilling, an average of 2,000 linear feet per cubic mile. Outside the United States, where 10 percent of all of the 15,000-foot­plus holes may have been drilled, the deepest sediments have been penetrated to an average extent of only 0.4 linear feet per cubic mile. In the United States 3,011 of the 3,412 deep holes have been sunk in Louisiana and Texas, 2,464 of them in Louisiana. More ought to be known about the deep sedi­ments of Louisiana than about those anywhere else in the world. The deep rocks of Louisiana have been drilled to the estimated extent of 20 linear feet per cubic mile: the comparable figures for Texas and the rest of the United States are 2.3 feet and 2.7 feet, respectively. All drilling at all depths in Texas averages about 2,744 feet per cubic mile of favorable sedimentary basin. For the rest of the United States the comparable figure is 1,355 feet per cubic mile. The first part of this article has established the pattern of past discovery and exploitation of crude oil and bas outlined the limits within which both the present and the future discovery and production of oil must occur. The second part will analyze some of the efforts already made to determine the probable magnitude of production and discovery of crude oil in the future. 'IJEXICO'S :\.-\TCRAL GAS: nu: BEC J.:\:\L\G OF AK IKDUSTRY ,,\· F 11,1.ifi o. .J ea:-, Builard This analysis of one important aspect of the Mexican economy dramatizes, against a setting of intense nationalism, the harnessing of Mexico's vast resources in natural gas to produce a poten· tially giant industry. Despite conflicting forces of technical obsolescence, untrained personnel, paucity of financial backing, and a struggling national economic development, the Mexican government agency Petroleos Mexicanos worked determinedly toward an ultimate goal of providing Mexico with self-sufficiency in its energy requirements. The transfiguration of a natural resource from a wasted by-product to a key raw material for a growing modern industry within the span of only a few years has been a record feat among develop­ing nations. In this book the reader will find a lively and stimulating, though thorough and tech· nical, discussion of the role played by natural gas in the economic development of Mexico. Profusely illustrated with 37 maps and charts and richly augmented with 85 detailed tables and appendix material, this study provides a variety of readers with a valuable source of information. 336 + xxiii pp. $6.50 Bureau of Business Research The University of Texas at Austin (Texas residents add 4-percent sales tax) TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW CONSTUCTION IN TEXAS FEBRUARY 1969 Lamar Smith Construction in Texas persists in its upward spiral. The authorization of the new "Texas Stadium," to be built in Irving for the Dallas Cowboys, the biggest con­struction news in Texas during February, can be con­sidered a symbol of that growth. This project helped push the total value of building construction authorized in Texas cities to an impressive $205,098,000 for the month, a 5-percent rise over the previous month. The fact that the value of permits issued during the first two months of 1969 exceeded that for the same period in 1968 by 22 percent indicates that this year may be on its way toward being one of the bes.t ever for the state's construction industry. February authorizations of nonresidential buildings ex­ceeded those in January by 20 percent, but the same pe­riod saw a 4-percent slump in residential permits. Again the Texas Stadium goes a long way toward explaining the jump in the nonresidential category: authorizations of structures other than buildings skyrocketed 3,412 percent. Still within the nonresidential category, other notable percentage increases occurred in amusement buildings (261), commercial garages (335), and works and utilities (689) . A comparison of February authorizations of resi­dential construction with those of the previous month indicates that all subgroupings registered declines except for 3-and 4-family dwellings and for apartment buildings, which rose 183 percent and one percent respectively. Adjustment of these raw figures for seasonal variation increases to 9 percent the month-to-month overall rise in total construction-through a 4-percent fall in residential authorizations and a 29-percent jump in nonresidential permits. In February the Bureau of Business Research Index of Total Construction Authorized stood at 208.6 percent of the 1957-1959 base-period average. In a break­down of the component parts the Index for residential construction becomes 165.2 percent of the same base, and for nonresidential building the Index becomes 280.5 per­cent. Another significant statistical comparison which shows a generally upward trend in the industry is that between construction activity in the first two months of 1969 and activity in the same period of 1968. As the value of total permits rose by 22 percent over the year, new construction was up 20 percent, new residential permits climbed 13 percent, new nonresidential buildings jumped 30 percent, and additions, alterations, and repairs went up 37 percent. Within the residential category, all subgroupings regis­tered gains with the exception of 3-and 4-family dwell­ings, which slipped 18 percent. With the Texas Stadium once more a big factor in the figures, the subgroupings of structures other than buildings shot up 2,087 percent. Other subgroupings of the nonresidential buildings cate­gory which had significant percentage increases were amusement buildings (90), educational buildings (77), and stores and mercantile buildings (112). Among those show­ing percentage losses were churches (-44) and works and utilities (-72) . APRIL 1969 Comparison of seasonally adjusted figures for the first two months of 1968 and 1969 as well as for February in each year also reflects the generally upward drift in the level of construction activity. Overall construction au­thorized showed a year-to-date increase of 23-percent in figures adjusted for seasonal variation-a 13-percent rise in residential combined with a 31-percent hike in non­residential permits. Again on the basis of February ad­justed figures, a 6-percent decline in residential permits combined with a 62-percent jump in nonresidential author­izations to give a 20-percent rise in overall activity. Houston led the state in value of large-apartment con­struction authorized with two projects valued at over $2 million each and two projects valued at over $1 million each. Dallas was not far behind with four projects costing TOTAL BUH.DING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS C&clude• addition•, alteration•, and r epair•. NOTE: Shad.-1 area• indicate period• o! d•cllne o! total b"elneu HO 250 200 ... 100 .. ... ... 200 ... 100 so ... ... soo ... 200 1JO 100 so • HO 100 250 200 ... 100 ISO - ... 200 ... .. 100 ... •oo ... - ... 200 1SO 100 a c tivity in the United St.ate•. in excess of $1 million each. Both San Antonio and El Paso granted permits for buildings to cost over $1 million. Standard metropolitan statistical areas showing the great­est percentage increases in value of apartment construc­tion in the 1969 year-to-date period over the comparable 1968 period were Austin (185), Brownsville-Harlingen­San Benito (516), Fort Worth (104), and Sherman-Deni­son (575) . The largest February 1969 dollar volumes oc­curred in Austin with $4,033,000, Dallas with $9,551,000, El Paso with $1,390,000, Fort Worth with $9,000,000, Houston with $11,394,000, and San Antonio with $1,525,000. For the state as a whole apartment construction authorized stood at $41,626,000, a 24-percent increase over the 1968 year-to-date period. Two-family dwelling units continued to be popular dur­ing February, with a 42-percent statewide increase in total value of permits over those of January-February 1968, larger than the percentage rise for either apartments or one-family dwelling units. Major contributors to the $2,198,000 total of authorizations for the state were Austin with $681,000, Dallas with $805,000, and Houston with $119,000. Percentage increases over the 1968 year-to­date period were largest in Dallas (237), Fort Worth (442), and Lubbock (1,173). One-family dwelling units maintained a slight lead over multifamily units during February in terms of the value of construction authorized: $49,071,000 versus $43,824,000. However, only 2,798 one-family dwelling units received permits compared with 6,195 multifamily units. The total value of one-family units receiving authorization was greatest in Austin with $4,467,000, Dallas with $13,703,000, El Paso with $2,080,000, Fort Worth with $4,823,000, Houston with $7,216,000, and San Antonio with $2,330,000. Year-to-year percentage increases in value were greatest in Abilene (60), Laredo (423), Sherman-Denison (111), and Tyler (147). Numerous nonresidential projects received permits dur­ing February in addition to the $15,975,300 Texas Stadium in Irving. Among the largest such industrial buildings were a $1,055,000 Levi Strauss Manufacturing Company plant in Wichita Falls, a $2,600,000 building in Grand Prairie, and a $1,598,000 remodeling of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram plant. Authorizations were giV2n in El Paso for a $2-million Holiday Inn, in Dallas for a $1,209,000 Y.M.C.A., and in Houston for a $1,700,000 re­modeling of a Sakowitz Department Store. Office build­ings approved included a $3,500,000 addition to Houston's River Oaks Bank and Trust Company and a $1,000,000 building for Butler Manufacturing Company in Gr~nd Prairie. Educational buildings continued to be important for the construction industry in Texas. Houston granted permits for a $3-million high school and a $1-million project at the University of Houston. Other construction for higher edu­cation receiving approval included a $3,085,000 project for The University of Texas at El Paso, a $3,244,946 building for The University of Texas at Austin, and a $1,103,000 addition to Abilene Christian College. Final figures for 1968 show that four Texas cities had total authorizations in excess of $100 million during the year and twenty-nine topped $10 million. Houston led the state with $405,721,130 in permits while Dallas followed with $281,287,777. The other two cities going over $100 million were Austin with $130,818,935 and San Antonio 112 with $111,235,399. Four other cities approved construction of over $50 million: Fort Worth, El Paso, Corpus Christi, and Arlington. Finally, eight more cities granted authori­zations valued at between $20 million and $50 million. In descending order they were Lubbock, Pasadena, Grand Prairie, Garland, Irving, Richardson, Galveston, and Amarillo. Although prospects continue to be somewhat murky, the immediate future for the construction industry, on balance, must be judged promising. In addition to having started the year with two good months, the industry should be helped by the Nixon Administration's moves to curtail the rise in prices of lumber and plywood. During the past year the prices of Douglas fir rose about 30 percent while those of softwood plywood jumped 92 percent. The Admini!!ltration appointed a task force to study the price rises and has since increased the timber (Continued on Page 113} Percent chance Feb Jan-Feb 1969 1969 Feb 1969 Jan-Feb 1969 from from Classification (thousands of dollars) Jan 1969 Jan-ftb 1968 ALL PERMITS .......205,098 400,047 22 New construction ... 185.190 360,207 20 Residential (house­keeping) 96,949 198,192 13 One-family dwellings 51,639 105,461 Multipls-family dwellings 45,310 92,731 4 21 Nonresidential buildings 88,241 162,015 20 30 H otels, motels, and tourist courts 2.718 9,060 -57 50 Amusement buildings 2,948 3,765 261 90 ··· ··· Churches ........ 2,145 4,867 -21 -44 Industrial buildings ...... 7,976 14,566 21 -8 Garages (commer­ cial and private) 2.080 2,855 168 -20 Service stations 1,703 3,643 -12 69 Hospitals and institutions 3,044 11 .371 -63 Office-bank buildings 9,880 19,460 3 Works and utilities ....... 4.253 4,792 689 -72 Educational buildings 14,835 31,151 77 Stol"!Zs and mercan­ tile buildings 15,962 33,570 9 112 Other buildings and structures 20,697 22,915 833 906 Additions, alterations, and repairs .... 19,908 39,840 •• 37 METROPOLITAN t vs. NONMETROP OLITAN t Total metropolitan ..184,560 359,391 6 23 Central cities .. . . 123,844 251,805 10 Outside central cities 60, 716 107 ,586 30 69 Total nonmetropolitan 20,538 40,656 2 12 10,000 to 60,000 population 13,233 25,361 10 Less than 10,000 population . . . . . . 7,305 15,695 18 t Standard metropolitan statistical area as defined in 1960 Census and revised in 1968. •• Change is less than one half of 1 ;>ercent. Source: Bureau of Business Research in cooperation with tbe Bureau of the Census, U .S. Department of Commerce. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Classification Number of Credit ratios• Collection ratioe t (annual sales reJ>Ortin11: Feb Feb Feb Feb volume 1968) stores 1969 1968 1969 1968 ALL STORES ........ . . 32 58.3 59.9 26.9 27.8 BY TYPE OF STORE Department stores . . .. . ...11 63.3 62.1 31.4 32.1 Dry-goods and apparel stores ......... 6 57.6 60.1 35.6 38.6 Wbmen's specialty shops 9 60.6 65.1 32.0 30.2 Men's clothing stores 50.5 64.9 44.4 48.0 BY VOLUME OF NET SALES Over $1,500,000 ..... . ....12 58.4 60.0 26.6 27.5 $500,000 to $1,500,000 .... 7 59.2 58.6 35.5 35.9 $250,000 to $500,000 .... . 5 49.1 59.0 42.2 45.4 Less than $250,000 ...... 8 47.1 55.0 32.9 33.9 • Credit sales divided by net sales. Collections during the month divided by accounts unpaid on first of the month. INDUSTRIAL ELECTRIC-POWER USE, TEXAS ... ... ... 200 150 100 .. /ndu Adju•tM lot S•Honal Variation-JfJ7-llSJ•/OO Shaded ar.a• indicate period• of decline of tot&l lN1lne11 activity in the United StatH. DOLLAR ESTIMATES OF ANNUAL TEXAS RETAIL SALES* NOTE: JOO ... 200 150 100 CONSTRUCTION IN TEXAS (Continued form Page 112) cut on federal lands by 1.1 billion board feet. Another step was to reduce Defense Department buying of soft­wood and plywood. Some negative factors are emerging. Interest rates have climbed even higher with another recent hike in the prime rate. Its recent rise to 7.5 percent marks the fourth in­crease in the prime rate since last Dece"mber 2. Conse­quently, borrowing money for construction continues to become more expensive, and most analysts believe a pinch is on the way for homebuilding before too long. In addi­tion, if the demand for borrowed funds does not slacken in the near future, the Federal Reserve may be expected to take more restrictive steps, which will drive interest rates above the already historically high levels. Nevertheless, businessmen are planning to increase capital expenditures by 14 percent over last year, accord­ing to the quarterly capital-spending survey of the Com­merce Department and the Securities and Exchange Com­mission. In consideration of these opposing forces, it ap­pears that heavy business investment in buildings and elsewhere should be more influential on the immediate future of construction than the belief that the high interest rates should be curtailing the investment. A T.\LOl PES FOR FRE!::H MARKET PRI G x.a, l Acreage Year P lanted 1959 4,500 1960 4,500 1961 4,900 1962 6,600 1963 9,100 1964 15,200 1965 15,500 1966 15,500 1967 13,500 1968 15,200 Production Year (1,000 cwt.) 1959 405 1960 399 1961 518 1962 759 1963 910 1964 840 1965 1,062 1966 428 1967 1,312 1968 938 Harvested 4,500 4,200 4,500 6 ~00 9,100 12,000 12,500 9,500 12,500 12,500 Season average price per cwt. 1 (dollars) 5.10 6.70 8.30 7.90 6.80 7.50 7.70 7.10 8.70 5.60 Yield per acre Cwt. 90 95 115 115 100 70 85 45 105 75 Value (l ,000 dollars) 2,066 2,673 4,299 5,996 6,188 6,300 8,177 3,039 11,414 5,253 DISTRIBUTION OF SPRING CANTALOUPE PRODUCTION Principal producing areas Rio Grande Valley Laredo Winter Garden Trans-Pecos Coastal Bend APRIL 1969 Principal counties Cameron, Hidalgo, Webb. Zapata Atascosa, Dimmitt, Uvalde, Zavala Presidio Kleberg Starr, Willacy Frio, La Salle, i F. O. B. shipping point. Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Texas Department of Agriculture, Teo;as Vegetable Statistics. LOCAL BUSINESS CONDITIONS Statistical data compiled by: Mildred Anderson, Constance Cooledge, Jwlith Moran, and Glenda Riley, statistical assistants, and Doris Dismuke and Mary Gorham, statistical technicians. Indicators of business conditions in Texas cities pub­lished in this table include statistics on banking, building permits, employment, postal receipts, and retail trade. An individual city is listed when a minimum of three indicators are available. The cities have been grouped according to standard metropolitan statistical areas. In Texas all twenty-three SMSA's are defined by county lines; the counties included are listed under each SMSA. The populations shown for the SMSA's are estimates for April 1, 1968, prepared by the Population Research Center, Department of Sociology, The University of Texas at Austin. The population shown after the city name is the 1960 Census figure, unless otherwise indicated. Cities in SMSA's are listed alpha­betically under their appropriate SMSA's; all other cities are listed alphabetically as main entries. Retail-sales data are reported here only when a mm1­mum total of fifteen stores report; separate categories of retail stores are listed only when a minimum of five stores report in those categories. The first column presents current data for the various categories. Percentages shown for retail sales are average statewide percent changes from the preceding month. This is the normal seasonal change in sales by that kind of business-except in the cases of Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, and San Antonio, where the dagger (t) is replaced by another symbol (tt) because the normal seasonal changes given are for each of these cities individually. The second column shows the percent change from the preceding month in data reported for the current month; the third column shows the percent change in data from the same month a year ago. A large variation between the normal seasonal change and the reported change indi­cates an abnormal sales month. Symbols used in this table include: (a) Population Research Center data, April 1, 1968. (b) Separate employment data for the Midland and Odessa SMSA's are not available, since employment figures for Midland and Ector Counties, composing one labor­market area, are recorded in combined form. (c) Separate employment data for Gladewater, Kilgore, and Longview are not available, since employment figures for Gregg County, composing one labor-market area, are recorded in total. ( t) Average statewide percent change from preceding month. (tt) Average individual-city percent change from pre­ceding month. (r) Estimates officially recognized by Texas Highway Department. (rr) Estimate for Pleasanton: combination of 1960 Census figures for Pleasanton and North Pleasanton. ( *) Cash received during the four-week postal account­ing period ended Mar. 7, 1969. (:J:) Money on deposit in individual demand deposit accounts on the last day of the month. ( §) Since Population Center data for Texarkana in­clude no inhabitants of Arkansas, the data given here are those of the Bureau of the Census, which include the populations of both Bowie County, Texas, and Miller County, Arkansas. ( * *) Change is less than one half of 1 percent. <;;) Annual rate basis, seasonally adjusted. (#) Monthly averages. (X) Sherman-Denison SMSA: a new standard metro­politan statistical area, for which not all categories of data are now available. Abilene (Abilene SMSA) Alamo (McAllen-Pharr-Edinburg SMSA) Albany Alice Alpine Amarillo (Amarillo SMSA) Andrews Angleton (Houston SMSA) Aransas Pass (Corpus Christi SMSA) Arlington (Fort Worth SMSA) Athens Austin (Austin SMSA) Bay City Baytown (Houston SMSA) Beaumont (Beaumont-Port Arthur-Orange SMSA) Beeville Bellville Belton Big Spring Bishop (Corpus Christi SMSA) Bonham j rr~T .,, J BTT'dXI~SS RE VILV' Borger Brady Brenham Brownfield Brownsville (Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito SMSA) Brownwood Bryan Burkburnett (Wichita Falls SMSA) Caldwell Cameron Canyon (Amarillo SMSA) Carrollton (Dallas SMSA) Castroville Cisco Cleburne (Fort Worth SMSA) Clute (Houston SMSA) College Station Colorado City Conroe (Houston SMSA) Copperas Cove Corpus Christi (Corpus Christi SMSA) Corsicana Crystal City Dallas (Dallas SMSA) Dayton (Houston SMSA) Decatur Deer Park (Houston SMSA) Del Rio Denison (Sherman-Denison SMSA) Denton (Dallas SMSA) Dickinson (Galveston-Texas City SMSA) Dimmitt Donna (McAllen-Pharr-Edinburg SMSA) Eagle Lake Eagle Pass Edinburg (McAllen-Pharr-Edinburg SMSA) Edna El Paso (El Paso SMSA) Elsa (McAllen-Pharr-Edinburg SMSA) Ennis (Dallas SMSA) Euless (Fort Worth SMSA) Farmers Branch (Dallas SMSA) Fort Stockton TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW ALPHABETICAL LISTING OF CITIES INCLUDED IN APRIL 1969 ISSUE OF TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW (continued) Fort Worth (Fort Worth SMSA) Fredericlubur&' Freeport (Houston SMSA) Friona Gat.eston (Galveston-Texas City SMSA) Garland (Dallas SMSA) Gatesville Geor&'etown Giddin&'• Gladewater Goldthwaite Graham Granbury Grand Prairie (Dallas SMSA) Grapevine (Fort Worth SMSA) Greenville Groves (Beaumont-Port Arthur-Oran&'• SMSA) Hallettsville Hallsville Harlingen (Brownaville-Harlin&'en-San Benito SMSA) Haskell Henderson Hereford Hondo Houston (BoDBton SMSA) Bumble (BoDBton SMSA) Huntsville Iowa Park (Wichita Falla SMSA) Irvin&' (Dallaa SMSA) Jacksonville Jasper Junction JDBtin (Dallas SMSA) Karnes City Katy (Houston SMSA) Kilgore Killeen Kingsland Kingsville Kirbyville La Feria (Brownaville-Harlin&'en-San Benito SMSA) La Marque (Galveston-Texas City SMSA) Lamesa Lampaaaa Lancaster (Dallaa SMSA) La Porte (Houston SMSA) Laredo (Laredo SMSA) Levelland Liberty (Houston SMSA) Littlefield Llano Lockhart Longview Los Fresnos (Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito SMSA) Lubbock (Lubbock SMSA) Lufkin McAllen (McAllen-Pharr-Edinbur&' SMSA) McCamey McGregor (Waco SMSA) McKinney (Dallas SMSA) Marble Falla Marshall Mercedea (McAllen-Pharr-Edinbur&' SMSA) Mesquite (Dallas SMSA) Mexia Midland (Midland SMSA) Midlothian (Dallas SMSA) Mineral Wells Mission (McAllen-Pharr-Edinbur&' SMSA) Monahans Mount Pleaaant Muenster Muleshoe N acO&'dochea Nederland (Beaumont-Port Arthur-Oran&'• SMSA) New Braunfels Nixon North Richland Bills (Fort Worth SMSA) Odessa (Odesaa SMSA) Olney Orange (Beaumont-Port Arthur-Orange SMSA) Palestine Pampa Paris Pecos Pharr (McAllen-Pharr-Edinbur&' SMSA) Pilot Point (Dallas SMSA) Plainview Pleasanton Port Aransas Port Arthur (Beaumont-Port Arthur-Orange SMSA) Port Isabel (Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito SMSA) Port Neches (Beaumont-Port Arthur-Orange SMSA) Quanah Raymondville Refugio Richardson (Dallas SMSA) Richmond (Houston SMSA) Robstown (Corpus Christi SMSA) Rockdale Rosenberg (Houston SMSA) San Angelo (San Angelo SMSA) San Antonio (San Antonio SMSA) San Benito (Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito SMSA) San Juan (McAllen-Pharr-Edinbur&' SMSA) San Marcos San Saba Schertz (San Antonio SMSA) Seagoville (Dallas SMSA) Seiruin (San Antonio SMSA) Sherman (Sherman-Denison SMSA) Silsbee Sinton (Corpus Christi SMSA) Slaton (Lubbock SMSA) Smithville Snyder Sonora South Houston (Houston SMSA) Stephenville Stratford Sulphur Sprin&'• Sweetwater Tahoka Taylor Temple Terrell (Dallas SMSA) Texarkana (Texarkana SMSA) Texas City (Galveston-Texas City SMSA) Tomball (Houston SMSA) Tyler (Tyler SMSA) U valde Vernon Victoria Waco (Waco SMSA) Waxahachie (Dallas SMSA) Weatherford Weslaco (McAllen-Pharr-Edinburg SMSA) White Settlement (Fort Worth SMSA) Wichita Falls (Wichita Falls SMSA) ALPHABETICAL LISTING OF SMSA'S AND CITIES WITHIN EACH SMSA, 'VITH DATA Percent change Percent chan&'e Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb from from Feb from from City and item 1969 Jan 1£69 Feb 1968 City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 r Tnner and aylor; pop. 120,10 ABILENE (pop. 110,054 ') Retail sales -12 11 Retail sales ....... ................. -St -12 11 Apparel stores ................. . . -21 -5 Automotive stores . .. . .. . . . ... .. . . -13 23 Apparel stores ........... ..... ... -20t --21 5 Building permits, less federal cont racts 1,348,900 392 703 Automotive stores . . .. ..... -2t -13 23 Bank debits (thousands) II ........ · · $ 1,984,008 9 Posta l receipts• ........ ........... . 161,086 -4 -4 End-of-month deposits (thousandsH .. $ 96,797 4 Building permits, less federal contracts 1.~35, 700 387 705 Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . 23.6 5 Nonfarm employment (area) ...... . 40,000 ·1 Bank debits (thousands) . .......... . $ 133,647 -17 10 Manufacturing employment (area) 4,900 13 End-of-month deposits (thousandsH .. $ 74,574 -6 4 Percent unemployed (area) ....... . . 2.5 9 -29 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 20.8 -11 6 For an explanation of symbols see p. 114. APRIL 1969 Percent change Percent change Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions City and item Feb 1969 Feb 1969 from Jan 1969 Feb 1969 from Feb 1968 City and item Feb 1969 Feb 1969 from Jan 1969 Feb 1969 from Feb 1968 AMARILLO SMSA Potter anc. Randall; pop. 177 ,1(, Retail sales f er or. and Oran e; pop. 320,f Retail sales Automotive stores ............... . Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,690,065 Bank debits (thousands) II .......... $ 5,180,904 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 148,371 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 35.2 Nonfarm employment (area) . . . . . . . 60,300 Manufacturing employment (area) 6,780 Percent unemployed (area) . . . . . . . . . 4.8 5 4 32 3 2 5 2 - 2.. 23 12 6 2 28 55 Apparel stores ... ... . ..........•. Automotive stores . . . . .......... . Food stores ........... . .... .. ... . Furniture and household-appliance stores ..... . ....... . . Lumber, building-material, and hardware dealers ....... , .. Building permits, less federal contracts 1,796,371 Bank debits (thousands) II .... ...... $ S,608,6S6 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 229,319 4 -13 19 9 •• -11 -19 1 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 24.S 3 Nonfarm employment (area) . . . . . . . 109,900 Manufacturing employment (area) 30,200 34 -12 AMARILLO (pop. 165,750 ') Percent unemployed (area) . . . . . . . . . 4.3 - 17 2 Retail sales ............. . ......... . Automotive stores ............... . Postal receipts• ... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) .......... . . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .... -5t -2t 347,636 1,551,965 398,752 137,769 34.4 4 38 14 9 2 •• 9 -27 2 12 6 BEAUMONT (pop. 127,500 ') Retail sales ....................... . Apparel stores Automotive stores .. . .......•... . . Lumber, building-material, and hardware dealers -St -2ot 2t 2t -12 -6 -lS -17 Postal receipts• .... . ..... . 200,237 10 19 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,286,673 20 -10 Bank debits (thousands) ........... $ 296,768 -20 Canyon (pop. 9,296 '') End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 131,884 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 13,001 6 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 27.1 -15 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 138,100 47S 121 Bank debits (thousands) .. ... ....... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 9,404 7,S09 14.3 -16 -10 -12 9 7 Groves (pop. 17,304) Postal receipts• .. . ................. $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ 12, 78S S0,93S 1 62 21 -57 Bank debits (thousands) ........... . 10,781 11 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. 6,047 1 15 U'STIN SMSA Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 21.S 8 - 3 all; pop 1, 46,100 ) Port Isabel (pop. 3,575) Postal receipts• . . . . $ 5,303 17 10 Retail sales Apparel stores Automotive stores 2 -15 4 13 15 Bank debits (thousands) ..... . ... . .. $ End-o~­month deposits (thousands}t .. $ Annual rate oI deposit turnover 2,673 3,565 10.0 8 26 -22 3 46 -21 Drugstores Eating and Food stores drinking places 2 8 7 14 2 SAN BENITO (pop. 16,420 ') Furniture and household-appliance stores . . . .. . 14 II Postal receipts• .. """"" $ 9,e46 - 9 -12 Gasoline and service stations 5 12 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 26,885 -23 -35 Lumber, building-material, Bank debits (thousands) ........ . $ 6.S~I -II 6 and hardware dealers 15 39 End-of-month deposits (thousands )t s 6,702 8 Office, store, and school Annual rate of deposit turnover 11. - 6 15 supply dealers 14 22 RISTI 8'18.\. Building permits, less federal contracts Bank debits (thousands) 11 $53, 753,381 $98,511,468 26 8 50 33 Retail sales .. Automotive stores . ...... . ...... . General-merchandise stores Building permits, less federal contracts pop. -7' 1,766,560 -10 11 -9 9 1 -34 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t Annual rate of deposit tu rnover Nonfarm employment (area) Manufacturing employment (area) Percent unemployed (area) .. $ 2,107,175 47.2 656,300 166,975 1.3 1 8 15 16 4 6 -13 $ 4,717,296 .. $ 201,603 Bank debits (thousands) II End-of-month deposits (thousands) t 4 Carrollton (pop. 9,832 ' ) Annual rate of deposit turnover .. .. 23.7 3 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . $ 38,569 30 73 Nonfarm employment (area) Manufacturing employment (area) 87,500 11,140 12 Building permits, less federal contracts Bank debits (thousands) II . . . . . S $ 41,700 10,800 91 19 -87 15 Percent unemployed (area) 3.2 - 11 II End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 6,625 61 Annual rate of deposit turnover 19.7 18 -18 For 2.n expl:ination of symbols see p. 114. APRIL 1969 Percent changePercent change Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb from from Feb from from Jan 1969 Feb 1968 City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 City and item 1969 DALLAS (pop. 810,000 ') Mesquite (pop. 51,496 ') Retail sales ... .............. . ..... . 5tt 7 10 Postal receipts• .................... $ 41,266 27 46 Apparel stores ...... . ...... .. .•.. !9tt 16 7 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 6?a,283 81 -1 Automotive stores ........... . ... . lltt 9 Bank debits (thousands) ............ S 18,276 30 Furniture and household-End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 10,057 2 9 appliance stores .............. . 6tt 16 9 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 21.6 21 Lumber, building-material, and hardware dealers . . . . . . . . . . 4tt -7 34 Midlothian (pop. 1,521) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,848,597 2 12 Building permits, less federal contracts 10,000 -93 -78 Building permits, less federal contracts $20,804,219 -22 18 Bank debits (thousands) ..... ....... $ 1,377 -10 Bank debits (thousands) ....... .. . .. $ 7,652,121 -21 34 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 1,881 2 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 1,783,512 14 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 8.7 -10 Annual rate of deposit turnover 51.4 -13 17 Pilot Point (pop. 1,603 ') Denton (pop. 26,844) Building permits, less federal contracts 140,900 Postal receipts• ..... .. . . ..... ... ... S 75,106 2 -2 Bank debits (thousands) . . .... ...... $ 1,824 -ll 29 Building permits, less federal contracts S 1,816,900 294 204 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 2,294 4 16 Bank debits (thousands) ... ... ... . .. S 41,657 -14 ll Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 9.3 -7 11 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. S 33,044 16 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 15.2 14 -6 Richardson (pop. 43,406 ') Nonfarm placements .......... . .... . 106 5 -24 Postal receipts• . .... . .. . . .. .... . ... $ 86, 787 10 Ennis (pop. 10,250 ') Bank debits (thousands) .. . . ....... . $ 39,159 18 16 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 20,577 3 17 Postal receipts• ..... .. ............ . 19,458 4 20 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 22.5 -17 -1Building permits, less federal contracts $ 60,709 3 1 Bank debits (thousands) ...... . ..... $ 7,547 27 8 Seagoville (pop. 4,410 ') End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 8,748 -1 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 10.3 -24 Postal receipts• .... ............... . S 8,548 -18 -27 Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ 53,746 374 Farmers Branch (pop. 13,441) Bank debits (thousands) .... . . .. . . .. $ 7,033 45 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 732,048 -21 55 End-of-month deposits (tho.usands) t .. $ 3,187 16 18 Bank debits (thousands) .. .......... $ 10,988 -12 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover 24.1 19 17 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 6,113 3 19 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 21.2 -8 6 Terrell (pop. 13,803) Garland (pop. 66,574 ') Postal receipts• .................... $ 13,568 12 Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ 153,150 137 P ostal receipts• .. . ........ . ........ $ 97,889 -3 43 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 12,963 -17 16 Building permits, !£Ss federal contracts S 1,312,458 -29 -31 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ ll,849 -1 9 Bank debits (thousands) . . .......... $ 53,122 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 13.0 -14End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . S 25,172 9 Waxahachie (pop. 15, 720 ') Grand Prairie (pop. 40,150 ') Postal receipts• .................... S 22,963 19 -15 P ostal receipts• ..... .. ... . .. .. .. . .. $ 71,239 18 29 Building permits, less federal contracts S l19,500 75 76Building permits, less federal contracts $ 6,895,780 234 26 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 14,383 -30 23 Bank debits (thousands) .. . ... . . .. . . $ 25,090 9 16 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 12,377 -5End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 16,344 5 Annual rate of deposit turnover .. . . 13.6 -24 12Annual rate of deposit turnover 18.3 8 Nonfarm placements 90 34 18 Irving (pop. 86,360 ') Postal receipts• ................. . , . 105,975 18 EL PASO SM::;A Buiiding perm'.ts, less federal contracts $17,298,725 436 Bank debits (thousands) .... . , .. . .. . S 64,761 -13 15 (El Paso; pop. 343,800 •) End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 30,242 9 21 Retail sales 11 Annual rate of deposit turnover 24.5 -13 -5 Apparel stores -14 6 Justin (pop. 62'2) Automotive stores .. . . . .... . . .. .. . •• 6 -16 -6 Postal receipts• .................... $ l,C63 Food stores ....... , ....... , ... , .. •• Building permits, less federal contracts $ 50,000 150 186 Building permits, less federal contracts $13,281,596 128 126 Bank debits (thousands) $ 995 20 Bank debits (thousands) 11 .......... $ 6,032,892 8 19 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 987 12 16 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. S 212,460 2 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 11.3 -15 -18 Annual rate of deposit turnover .. , . 28.1 4 10 Nonfarm employment (area) .. , . . . . l13,500 7 Lancaster (pop. 10,117 ') Manufacturing employment (area) 22,350 23 - Building permits, less ~ederal contracts $ 457,900 458 550 Percent unemployed (area) . . . . . . . . . 3.2 -29 Bank debits (thousands) ....... . .... $ 8,893 5 26 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 5,086 13 EL PASO (pop. 315,000 ') Annual rate of deposit turnover .. . . 20.7 5 13 Retail sales .. ........ ... ..... . .... . 11 5t McKinney (pop. 16,237 ') Apparel stores . . . . . . • . . . . • . . . . . . . 20j 14 Postal receipts• .................... S 21,944 -2 2 Automotive stores . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . 2t Building permits, less federal contracts $ 762,350 275 824 Food stores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -6t Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ ll,965 -26 12 Postal receipts• .... ................ $ 472,838 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 14,093 -8 8 Building permits, less federal contracts $13,281,036 127 128 Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . 9.8 -20 2 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 492,845 -18 19 Nonfarm placements ............... . 129 ll -19 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 232,644 5 Annual rate of deposit turnover 26.0 For an explanation of symbols see p. l14. -17 11 TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Percent change Percent change Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb from from Feb from from City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 ORT WO S. SA White Settlement (pop. 11,513) Johnson and Tarrant; pop. 629,4C~ Building permits, less federal contracts $ 18,330 -56 -64 Retail saJes . .........•••.•.•.•.•. . . 4 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 6,428 9 22 Apparel stores ........... . .... , .. 12 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 3,224 6 27 Automotive stores ........... . . .. . 7 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 24.6 Eating and drinking places . ... . . -10 Gasoline and service stations . . .. . 8 GALVEST N-TEXAS Cur SMSA Lumber, building-material, and hardware dealers ... . .. ... . (Galveston; pop. 168,600 ") 6 36 Building permits, less federal contracts $20,249,171 2 30 Retail sales -8 -4 Bank debits (thousands) II ..... ..... $18,898,536 8 Apparel stores .. ....... . . . • ...... -21 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 610,971 2 12 Automotive stores . .. .. ... . .... . . . 5 -11 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 31.3 3 2 Drugstores ........ . . ............ . -6 1 2 Nonfarrn employment (area) . . . . . . . 279,600 .. Food stores ...... . ... . ....... . .. . -4 3 Manufacturing employment (area) 90,575 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,037,329 -84 9 Percent unemployed (area) . . . . . . . . . 1.7 .. .. Bank debits (thousands) II .... ...... $ 2,563,896 -1 4 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 105,200 -4 8 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 23.9 .. 4 Arlington (pop. 79,713 ') Nonfarrn employment (area) . . . . . . . 54,900 Manufacturing employment (area) 10,800 2 4 Retail sales ..... .. ................ . -5t -5 Postal receipts• ... . .. . .... . ........ $ 167,115 2 17 Percent unemployed (area) . . . . . . . . . 5.2 2 79 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 6,514,900 67 135 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 97,610 1 37 Dickinson (pop. 4,715) End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. S 42,373 2 24 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 12,979 -6 32 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 27.9 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 6,245 -11 6 Annual rate of dePQsit turnover .... 23.5 -6 9 Cleburne (pop. 15,381) GALVESTON (pop. 67,175) Postal receipts• ........... . ... .. . . . $ 23,109 -16 6 Retail sales -5t -10 ········ ·· ············· · Building permits, less federal contracts $ 234,000 -89 437 Apparel stores -20t -21 1 ····· ··· ···· ······· Bank debits (thousands) ....... . .... $ 17,962 -12 14 Food stores -St -3 6 ·················· ···· End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 16,266 -2 17 Postal receipts• ........ .. .......... $ 102,748 33 17 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 13.1 -10 -2 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 530,900 38 -23 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 106,570 -27 -9 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 65,382 7 Euless (pop. 10,500 ') Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 19.5 -22 -14 Postal receipts• ... .. ............... $ 15,290 -1 19 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,124,368 95 La Marque (pop. 13,969) Bank debits (thousands) ... ......... $ 13,592 -11 15 Postal receipts• ········ · · ·· ········ $ 16,080 •• -11 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 4,593 -15 Build.ing permits, less federal contracts $ 230,579 -94 588 Bank debits (thousands) .... .. . ... .. $ 15,337 21 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 9,501 19 Annual rate of depcsit turnover .... 32.7 -3 10 TEXAS CITY (pop. 38,276 ') FORT WORTH (pop. 356,268) Postal receipts• . ................... $ 38,584 15 Retaii sales ...... . .... ..... . . ..... . -6tt -1 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 275,850 -87 -34Apparel stores .... .. . . ...... . . . . . -23tt -12 4 Bank debits (thousands) .. .......... $ 42,919 14 15 Automotive stores ............ .. . . 5tt 10 27 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 16,234 -20 6Eating and drinking places .... . . 4tt -10 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 28.2 13 Gasoline and service stations .... . 4tt -8 9 Lumber. building-material, and hardware dealers . . . . . . . . . . 9tt 24 22 OUS10N SMSA Postal receipts• ........ ... ......... $ 1,226,731 -3 -4 Brazoria, Fort B<'nct, Harris, Liberty and Building permits, less federal contracts $ 6,719,260 -47 -24 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 1,289,943 -15 6 u-ntgomery; pop. 1,836,700 ") Retaii sa!es ....... ...... ....... . . . . 2 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 513,169 2 11 Apparel stores .. .. . . . . 2 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 30.4 -12 -3 Automotive stores Eating and drinking places .... . . .. Grapevine (pop. 4,659 ') Food . ............... 4 6 stores . .... . Furniture and household- Postal receipts• .... . ............... $ 9,367 •• -2 appliance stores ........... . . . • -12 Bank debits (thousands) .. . ... . . . ... $ 5,629 -15 22 General-merchandise stores -18 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ . . $ 4,862 19 Liquor stores ..... ... . . .. .. ..... . -12 22 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . 13.9 -14 5 Lumber, building-material, and hardware dealers ......... . -4 25 Building permits, less federal contracts $44, 733, 726 -10 -6 North Richland Hills (pop. 8,662) Bank debits (thousands) II .. $83,580,228 5 11 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 786,400 5 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ . . $ 2,450,824 7 17 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 13,721 3 17 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . 35.2 6 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 6,861 5 26 Nonfarm employment (area) 789,300 .. 7 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 24.6 4 -3 Manufacturing employment (area) 142,000 Percent unemployed (area) . . 2.0 .. 11 For an explanation of symbols see p, 114. APRIL 1969 Percent changePercent change Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb from from Feb from from City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Angleton (pop. 9,131) La Porte (pop. 7,500 ') Postal receipts* 10,640 -47 -6 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 147,489 119 84 Building permits, less federal contracts 222,750 3 40 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . . $ 5,622 4 8 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 19,856 6 19 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 4,526 7 34 End-of-month deposits (thousands); $ 15,015 22 Annual rate of deposit turnover 14.4 -16 Annual rate of 67 16 Postal receipts• . ..... . .. .. ..... . .. . $ 26,596 -14 -7 Annual rate of deposit turnover 20.6 2 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 31,400 -88 -45 Nonfarm employment (area) .... .. . 24,600Bank debits (thousands) .. .. ... . .... $ 24,619 7 2 Manufacturing employment (area) 1,390End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . $ 16,642 5 II Percent unemployed (area) .... 10.3 -5 -11 Annual rate of deposit turnover 18.2 13 LAREDO (pop. 71,512' ') HOUSTON (pop. 938,219) Postal receipts• ....... ..... ........ $ 67. 721 9 Retail sales stt -9 I Building permits, less federal contracts $ 764,915 176 289 Apparel stores ..... .. . . . 15tt -8 2 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 62,905 9 20 Automotive stores . . . . . . ........ . 1tt -10 6 .. End-of-month deposits (thousands) t $ 39,551 16Eating and drinking places .. .. . . 5tt Annual rate of deposit turnover 19.l 2 Food stores ............. .. .. .. .. . 5tt 9 Nonfarm placements ... 447 22 -28General-merchandise stores .. . 1tt 18 3 Lumber, building-material, and hardware dealers . . . . . . . . . . 1tt 26 Ll'BBOCK S. ;:,a Postal receipts• . . . . . . $ 3,766,423 4 9 1 r ·1bbol k; pop. 198 1)00 Building permits, less federal contracts $39,650,490 4 3 Retail sales -12 Bank debits (thoasands) ............ $ 6,222,280 -19 11 Automotive stores .. .......... . -7 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 2,133,660 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 3,318,326 102 181 Annual rate of deposit turnover 36.1 -16 -2 Bank debits (thousands) II .... ...... $ 3,616,476 2 5 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 151,757 18 Humble (pop. 1,711) .. Annual rate of dep::lsit turnover 24.5 Postal receipts• ... .. .......... . ... . $ 5,864 -5 Nonfarm employment (area) . . . . . . . 64,600 •• Building permits, less federal contracts $ 25,250 .. -20 Manufacturing employment (area) 7,260 Bank debits (thousands) ... ......... $ 5,976 7 17 Percent unemployed (area) 2.9 16 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 5,064 7 22 Annual rate of deposit turnover 13.7 8 -4 LUBBOCK (pop. 170,025 ') Retail sales ....................... . -st 12 .. Katy (pop. 1,569) Automotive stores . . ... ... ....... . -2t 7 -6 Building permits, less federal contracts :ioo 99 -99 Postal receipts* . . ... . ............. . 302,383 15 Bank debits (thousands) .. ........ .. $ 5,306 2 74 Building permits, less federal C::lntracts $ 3,234,051 174 98 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 3,577 11 15 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . . . $ 310,102 35 5 Annual rate of deposit turnover ... 18.7 4 58 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 148,251 Annual rate of deposit turnover 24.8 33 •• For an explanation of symbols see p. 114. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Local Business Conditions Percent change Local Business Conditions Percent change Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb from from Feb from from City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 Slaton (pop. 6,568) Mercedes (pop. 11,843 ') Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 7,048 -4 -5 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 5,463 16 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 44,995 -87 81Building permits, less federal contracts $ 57,175 293 Bank debits (thousands) . ........... $ 6,563 -12 7 Bank debits (thousands) ....... .. . . . $ 5,835 -35 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 4,675End-of-month deposits (thousands )J: .. $ 4,537 Annual rate of deposit turnover 16.4 -12 4Annual rate of deposit turnover . ... 14.7 -31 Mission (pop. 14,081) J\lcALLE -PHARR EI S'\ISA Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 12.487 -12 -9 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 22,495 -64 -45 Hidalgo; pop. 177,100 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 15,237 -20 7 End-of-month deposits (thousands )J: .. $ 12,360 2 9 Retail sales .. -15 Annual rate of deposit turnover 14.6 -18 Apparel stores l4 3 Automotive stores -16 2 Food stores ....... .... ... .. ..... , 6 8 PHARR (pop. 15,279 ') Furniture and housi:hold-Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . .. .. ... . $ 11,155 -9 25 appliance stores ...... . . . . ... .• 31 17 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 348,790 257 Gasoline and service stations . .. .. 8 6 Bank debits (thousands) ... $ 6,258 -11 19 General-merchandise stores .. -11 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands)J: .. $ 6,120 -11 18 Lumber, building-material, Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 11.6 -8 -2 and hardware dealers -13 -20 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,951,430 25 94 San Juan (pop. 4,371) Bank debits (thousands) II . . . $ 1,511,592 13 Postal receipts* . $ 3,887 -12End-of-month deposits (thousands )J: $ 89, 729 2 7 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 2,625 -81 -83Annual rate of deposit turnover 17.0 3 7 Bank debits (thousands) $ 3,744 7 32 Nonfarm employment (area) 48,700 10 End-of-month deposits (thousandsH .. $ 3,526 8 -6Manufacturing employment (area) 5,780 4 43 Annual rate of deposit turnover 12.2 28Percent unemployed (area) 6.3 21 7 Weslaco (pop. 15,649) Alamo (pop. 4,121) Postal receipts* .. . $ 18,732 21 Building permits, less federal C:Jntracts $ 79,000 -72 -6 Bank debits (thocisands) .... $ 3,020 1 25 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 13,426 5 13 End-of-month deposits (thousands)J: .. $ 1,752 1 28 End-of-month deposits (thousands)J: .. $ 12,594 Annual rate of depcsit turnover .... 20.8 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 12.6 4 l 1 1.JLA1 D s .,A Donna (pop. 7,612 ' ) '~id•md; pop. 65 200 Postal receipts• ........... $ 6,589 25 Retail sales .. ........... .......... . -19 11 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 7,220 -89 38 Automotive stores ...... . 10 7 Bank debits (thousands) . ... . ... . ... $ 3,743 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 489,420 8 -42End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ $ 5,544 10 Bank debits (thousands) 11 . ..... • ... $ 1,925,268 16 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 129,446 6 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . 14.8 9 EDINBURG (pop. 18, 706) Nonfarm employment (area) b 60,100 .. Manufacturing employment (area) b 4,810 .. Postal receipts• ....... ... .... $ 22,530 8 Percent unemployed (are3) b 2.3 -23 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 351,600 7 75 Bank debits (thousands) .. . . .. . .... . $ 26,179 4 7 End-of-month deposits (thousands )+ . . $ 14,473 8 MIDLAND (pop. 62,625) Annual rate of deposit turnover 20.8 Retail sales ... -5t -19 11Nonfarm placements ..... . . .... . .. . . 256 38 7 Automotive stores -2t -10 7 Post.!! receipts* .......... . .. $ 141,669 -22 7 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 489,420 8 -41 Elsa (pop. 3,847) Bank debits (thousands) ....... ..... $ 149,135 -22 18 End-of-month deposits (thousands )J: .. $ 129,058 -3 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . $ 3,213 -16 17 Annual rate of deposit turnovE.r 13.7 19 10End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ $ 2,282 14 Nonfarm placements .. 668 5 2Annual rate of deposit turnover ... 17.4 -19 7 ODESSA ~l\. McALLEN (pop. 35,411 ' ) (Ect > ; pr,>. 83 2(,') Retail sales ...... .. . -5t -11 -1 R•tail sales . .... . -13 7 Apparel stores Postal receipts* . . . . .. $ 54,962 -2 5 -20 24 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,090,705 152 115 Building permits, less feJ.eral contracts $ 1,299,984 254 272 Bank debits (thousands) II .... $ Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . $ 52,823 18 15 1,384,896 -6 12 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 33,579 5 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ . . $ 76,774 4 16 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . .. 18.4 -11 3 Nonfarm placements . . . ......... . . . . 550 49 -27 Nonfarm employment (area) b 60,100 •• Manufacturing employment (area) b 4,810 1 •• Percent unemployed (area) b ... . . . . 2.3 8 -23 For an explanation of symbols see p. 114. Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 18.7 15 APRIL 1969 121 Percent changePercent change Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb from from Feb from from City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 ODESSA (pop. 80,338) Schertz (pop. 2,867 ') Retail sales ......... .. ........ . . . . . Apparel stores .................. . Postal receipts• . ............ . . . .... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ -St -20t 118,421 1,299,984 -13 -20 -4 254 7 24 8 272 Postal receipts• .. ........... . ...... $ Bank debits (thousands) ....... . .... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 2,6S4 698 l,09S 7.6 -11 11 •• -24 10 s Bank debits (thousands) .... . .. .... S llS,872 -14 13 End-of-month deposits (thousands )t . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . 79,203 17.S -1 -16 - 20 6 Seguin (pop. 14,299) Nonfarm placements ... .. . . ........ . 726 - 20 68 Postal receipts• ........ .. ......... . $ 18, 729 - 7 - 2 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 239,334 -90 137 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 17,030 -17 14 End-of-month deposits (thousands )t .. $ 18,3S3 s 7 SAN ANGELO SMSA Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 11.4 -17 10 (Tom Green; pop. 75,200 •) Retail sales -13 9 SHERMAN-DL ...,(,, S. SA :c Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) 11 .... .. .... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . Nonfarm employment (area) ...... . Manufacturing employment (area) Percent unemployed (area) ........ . 61S,102 l,09S,372 6S,S24 17.0 23,2SO 3,770 3.0 48 4 2 1 7 -29 9 7 3 2 30 (Grayson, pop. fs0,500 ") Retail sales Apparel stores ...... .. .......... . Automotive stores ..... .. ... .... . . Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) II . . . . . . . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 1,327,794 920,280 S9,026 -8 -16 -7 62 7 - 17 3 17 136 10 10 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... lS.O 8 - 3 SAN ANGELO (pop. 58,815) DENISON (pop. 25, 766 ') Postal receipts• ............. . ..... . 28,608 -22 -9 Retail sales .. ..................... . -st -13 9 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 646,6S4 40 332 Postal receipts• ........ . ........... $ 141,860 4 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 26,033 -19 u Building permits, less federal contracts $ 61S,102 48 -29 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i .. $ 19,706 -16 Bank debits (thousands) . .. .... .. .. . $ 83,972 -21 Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . 14.4 -15 -6 End-of-month deposits (thousands )t .. $ 64,934 2 7 Nonfarm placements .............. . . 160 14 34 Annual rate of deposit turnover . ... lS.7 -18 3 SHERMAN (pop. 30,660 ') Retail SAN ANTONIO SMSA Automotive stores .............. . -2t -6 16 (~exar and Guadalupe; pop 837,ff Postal receipts• .................... $ S6,743 14 14 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 667,140 108 72 Retail sales 3 Bank debits (thousands) .... ........ $ 41,760 -24 10 Apparel stores .................. . -11 10 End-of-month deposits (thousands )t .. $ 28,47S -3 Automotive stores ... . ... . ....... . 7 Annual rate of deposit turnover 17.3 -20 -1 Eating and drinking places .... . . 1 Nonfarm placements ... . ......... .. . 292 23 79 General-merchandise stores . ...... . 2 Building permits, less fe:leral contracts $ 6, 733,304 -38 -55 Bank debits (thousands) II .......... $14,701,296 2 -2 ~'EXARKANA SMSA End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 622,236 4 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 24.1 3 -12 , Texas and Miller, Ark.; pop. 1 01 Nonfarm employment (area) . . . . . . . 279,100 •• Manufacturing employment (area) 32,100 •• Retail sales 8 -4 Percent unemployed (area) . . . . . . . . . 2.8 8 -lS Building permits. less federal contracts S 369,441 213 -49 Bank debits (thousands) 11 . . ..... ... $ l,Sll,196 4 10 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i .. $ 71,804 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover 21.8 -2 SAN ANTONIO (pop. 726,660 ') Nonfarm employment (area) . . 44,4SO .. Manufacturing employment (area) 16,200 .. 25 Retail sales -4tt -4 -3 Percent unemployed (a~a) 2.6 .. -4 Apparel stores ................... -19tt -11 10 Automotive stores ................ ltt •• 7 Eating and drinking places ...... -3tt 1 3 ························ TEXARKANA (pop. 50,006 ') Postal receipts• $ 1,367,224 4 3 ···· · · ···· · ·· ··· ···· Building permits, less federal contracts $ 6,331,879 -38 -S6 Retail sales ........ . ... . -st -8 -4 Bank debits (thousands) .. . . . . . .. . . . $ 1,137,719 -14 -2 Postal receipts• .................... S 96,624 -6 -2 End-of-month deposits (thousandsH .. $ S83,408 11 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 367,941 217 -47 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 23.4 -12 -12 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . .... $ lOS,991 -19 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands )t .. $ 58,994 3 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover 21.9 -19 -3 For an explanation of symbols see p. 114. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Local Business Conditions Percent change Percent change Local Business Conditions Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb from from City and item 1969 Feb from from Jan 1969 Feb 1968 City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 TYLER S SA WACO (pop. 103,462) (Smith; pop. 99,100 Retail sales Apparel stores Drugstores . . ... . ........... . Building permits, less federal contracts Bank debits (thousands) II ...... . End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnove:r ... . Nonfarm employment (area) . ... . Manufacturing employment (area) Percent unemployed (area) ........ . 794,198 1,870,248 91,861 20.5 36,600 10,660 2.4 ---- 11 16 2 43 9 2 6.. 2 20 - 9 2 18 225 10 8 I 5 14 14 Retail sales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -5t Postal receipts• ... .. ............ ... $ 295,880 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,961,323 Bank debits (thousands) ..... . ..... $ 192,189 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 97,060 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 23.1 -12 66 12 5 9 WICHITA FALLS SMSA (Archer and Wichita; pop 132,200 •) - 1 2 67 15 4 18 Retail sales - 11 13 TYLER (pop. 51,230) Retail sales . ...... . Apparel stores Drugstores .... . . Postal receipts• Building permits, less federal c: ntracts $ $ -5t -20t -5t 139,948 793,398 ---- 11 16 2 43 - 9 2 18 4 224 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 2,220,406 Bank debits (thousands) 11 ........... $ 2,250,024 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 119,545 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 19.2 Nonfarm employment (area) . . . . . . . 50,100 Manufacturing employment (area) 5,140 Percent unemployed (area) . . . . . . . . . 1.9 - 4 6 4 8.. 5 - 216 11 5 2 13 17 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 144,085 - 22 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t Annual rate of deposit turnover Nonfarm placements ... ...... . . .. $ 82,805 20.7 469 -- 2 17 32 2 Burkburnett (pop. 7,621) Building permits, less federal contracts $ 0 WACO SMSA 1 McLennan· pop. 148,400 • Bank debits (thousands) . .. .. .. .. .. . $ 7,094 End-of-month deposits (thousandsH .. $ 5,080 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 16.3 -18 -5 -16 -- 12 19 Retail sales - 12 I Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) I\ ....... .... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .. . . Nonfarm employment (area) . ..... . Manufacturing employment (area) 1,994,223 2,625,132 108,700 23.6 57,900 12,470 58 68 13 3 16 3 I Iowa Park (pop. 5,152 r) Building permits. less federal contracts Bank debits (thousands) . .... .. ..... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . . .. 3,650 3,953 3,687 12.5 7 30 5 21 Pe::-cent unemployed (area) ... . .. . . . 4.8 20 McGregor (pop. 4,642) WICHITA FALLS (pop. 115,340 ') Retail sales ... . ............ .. ..... . - 5t -11 13 Building permits, less federal contracts 15,400 927 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 2,216,756 6 251 Bank debits (thousands) . .......... . End-of-month deposits (thousandsH .. $ 4,224 7,878 -- 32 I - 27 4 Bank debits (thousands ) ............ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 162,994 101,579 -21.. 11 5 Annual rate of deposit turnover .. .. 6.4 - 31 - 29 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 19.2 -18 6 • LPHA ETICAL L Sfll'iiG OF NON-SMSA C TIES, 'VITH DATA ALBANY (pop. 2,174) ANDREWS (pop. 13,450 r) Postal receipts• ..... . . $ 10,051 -14 -5 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 0 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 192,000 292 179 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 3,341 13 31 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 7,098 -15 2 End-of-month deposits (thoi:sanCs)t .. $ 3,880 -11 -I End-of-month deposits (thousandsH .. $ 8,172 -2 14 Annual rate of deposit turnovtr 9.7 20 26 Annual rate of deposit turnover 10.3 -20 -10 ALICE (pop. 20,861) ATHENS (pop. 10,260r) Postal receipts• ........ . .. $ 22,507 -5 Postal receipts• .. . . ... .. $ 19,088 13 ·········· · Building permits, less federal contra:::.ts $ 2,563,239 16 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 75,150 -14 82 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 24,297 -13 8 Bank debits (thousands) 11,300 -21 ···· ······· · End-of-month deposits (thousands) t $ 19,893 9 End-of-month deposits (thousandsH .. $ 11,332 Annual rate of deposit turnover 14.0 -4 Annual rate of deposit turnover 11.9 -17 ALPINE (pop. 4,740) BAY CITY (pop. 11,656) Postal receipts• ............... . .... $ 7,649 -11 - 9 Postal receipts• ··········· ········· $ 18,289 - 15 - 5 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 11,800 -60 490 Building permits. less federal contracts $ 50,500 - 62 - 42 Bank debits (thousands) ....... .. ... $ 4,785 9 Bank debits (thousands) ........... . $ 21,095 - 42 2 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) t .. $ 5,604 IO End-of-month deposits (thousandsH . . $ 30,025 - 2 Annual rate of deposit turnover . ... 9.7 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 8.3 - 41 7 For an explanation of symbols see p. 114. Nonfarm placements .............. .. 78 - 6 13 APRIL 1969 123 Percent change Percent change Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb from from Feb from from City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 BEEVILLE (pop. 13,811) BRYAN (pop. 33,141 ') Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 16,717 - 9 - 8 Postal receipts• . ... . ............... $ 45,351 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 32,650 -87 -76 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 614,568 -52 -20 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 15,390 -16 15 Bank debits (thousands) . . . ...... $ 55,982 -18 23 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 17,759 - 1 4 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 30,707 - 6 19 Annual rate of deposit turnover .. . 10.4 -15 9 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 21.2 -13 Nonfarm placements .... . . . ........ . 87 - 5 14 Nonfarm placements . . . . ........... . 315 36 BELLVILLE (pop. 2,218) Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover 17,200 4,856 5,975 9.6 -15 -22 -3 -21 -89 -11 3 -8 CALDWELL (pop. 2,204 ') Postal receipts• . . .. . ............... $ Bank debits (thousands) .... ...... .. $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover 3,896 4,053 4,553 10.2 4 8 15 - 43 2 40 BELTON (pop. 10,000 ') Postal receipts• ................ . . . . $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 14,188 91,950 11,230 - 8 129 4 -41 51 11 CAMERON (pop. 5,640) Postal receipts• .. .' ....... . ... . ..... $ Bank debits (thousands) $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 6,781 5,903 6,366 11.3 -16 -19 3 -18 -42 16 12 9 BIG SPRING (pop. 31,230) CASTROVILLE (pop. 1,800 ') Postal receipts• .................... $ 47,330 12 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 65,560 297 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 60,340 -72 51 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . $ 1,087 -21 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . $ 49,079 -21 13 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 1,436 12 12 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 31,549 - 1 19 Annual rate of deposit turnover 9.6 - 23 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 18.6 -21 4 Nonfarm placements 162 29 -39 CISCO (pop. 4,499) Postal receipts• ........ ' ........... $ 6,561 12 BONHAM (pop. 9,506 ') Postal receipts* . .................. . Building pet"mits, less federal contracts $ 10,081 30,200 12 -68 7 34 Bank debits (thousands) ... . . . . ..... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 4,106 4,297 11.4 -23.. -21 -14 8 -20 Bank debits (thousands) . .. ... ... .. . $ 9,067 -19 -18 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 10,153 3 COLLEGE STATION (pop. 18,590 ') Annual rate of deposit turnover 10.5 -19 -24 Postal receipts• ............... .. ... $ 34,404 -16 11 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 105,053 -92 -42 BORGER (pop. 20,911) Postal receipts• .... . ... . . . ...... .. . $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ 25,678 56, 750 -45 Bank debits (thousands) . $ End-of-month deposits (thoi:sands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover . . .. 8,328 6,447 15.7 5 Nonfarm placements .... . . . .. .. .. .. . 92 51 3 COLORADO CITY (pop. 6,457) BRADY (pop. 5,338) Po::;tal receipts• . . . Bank debits (thousands) . ........ . .. $ ... $ 6,472 4,871 -4 -37 -1 -13 Post.al receipts* .. .. ... .. ... . ... . ... $ 6,288 - 2 - 1 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 6,955 - 5 - 3 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 56,500 181 57 Annual rate of deposit turnover 8.2 - 34 -12 Bank debits (thoc:san1s) . . . ... $ 7,764 -13 20 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 8,234 8 21 COPPERAS COVE (pop. 10,202 ') Annual rate of deposit turnover 11.8 -16 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 8,275 24 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 220,053 136 527 BRENHAM (pop. 7,740) Postal receipts* .. ... .. ...... .. ... . . $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ 14,418 112,524 - 4 12 .. 192 Bank debits (thousands) ... . ... . .... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 3,542 2,337 18. 7 6 70 25 42 Bank debits (tho,·sands) ............ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 16,496 16,657 -12 1 15 5 CORSICANA (pop. 20,344) Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . 11.8 - 9 9 Postal receipts• $ 39,078 12 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 91,554 12 -52 BROWNFIELD (pop. 10,286) Postal receipts* ..... .. .. .. ....... . . $ Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 13,006 20,281 20,451 -4 -47 8 - 4.. 36 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .... Nonfarm placements . .............. . 26,932 25,568 12.7 188 -19 -17 39 - 12 2 10 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 12.4 -50 -18 CRYSTAL CITY (pop. 9,101) BROWNWOOD (pop. 16,974) Building permits, less federal contracts Bank debits (thousands) $ $ 498,530 4,100 777 -25 -1 Retail sales ............. . ... . Postal receipts* . . . . . . . . . . . $ -5t 37,351 - 8 13 13 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t Annual rate of deposit turnover .. $ 3,359 14.7 -20 -3 •• Building permits, less federal contracts $ 81,930 -64 Bank debits (thousands) . . . .. . . $ 21,242 -14 18 DECATUR (pop. 3,563) End-of-month deposits (thousands)t Annual rate of deposit turnover Nonfarm placements .... . . . .. $ 14,659 17.6 98 2 12 13 9 9 -25 Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ......... . . . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 24,000 4,489 5,056 -24 -1 For an explanation of symbols see p. 114. Annual rate of deposit turnover 10.6 -24 TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Local Business Conditions Percent change Local Business Conditions Percent change Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb from from Feb from from City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 DEL RIO (pop. 23,290 ') GIDDINGS (pop. 2,821) Postal receipts• .................... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover 26,618 84,308 16,584 20,394 9.9 -4 63 -10 2 -11 17 -85 4 5.. Postal receipts• .. . .. ............... $ Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) . .. .... .... . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 6,118 11,535 4,745 5,679 10.0 -46 -18 -17 - 17 3 13 12 DIMMITT (pop. 4,500 ') GLADEWATER (pop. 5,742) Postal ree:eipts• ......... .. ....... .. $ 7,147 26 20 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 12,020 -39 17 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 33,950 145 - 36 End-of-month dePQSits (thousands)t .. $ 9,848 - 7 34 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 6,450 -11 27 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 14.2 -36 -14 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 4,839 3 EAGLE LAKE (pop. 3,565) Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . $ 4,085 5,743 -19 -6 -19.. Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . Nonfarm employment (area) c ..... . Manufacturing employment (area) c Percent unemployment (area) c ... . . 16.0 35,000 10,080 2.2 - 9.. ••.. 28 5 14 -12 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 8.3 - 16 -15 GOLDTHWAITE (pop. 1,383) Postal receipts• ........... . 3,662 29 - 6 EAGLE PASS (pop. 12,094) Bank debits (thousands) .... .... .... $ 4,526 -23 10 Postal receipts• ... . ........ ........ $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ 14,963 470,025 - 1 155 12 393 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t Annual rate of deposit turnover .. $ 4,056 13.2 -2 -20 8 29 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 8,342 -18 5 End-of-month dePQSits (thousands)t .. $ 5,228 - 3 3 GRAHAM (pop. 9,326 ') Annual rate of deposit turnover 18.8 -16 Postal receipts• .................... $ 11,093 -16 -24 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 271,650 20 715 EDNA (pop. 5,038) Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 10,783 11,305 -16 20 11 Postal receipts• ...... . .. ........ ... $ 6,214 -23 -14 Annual rate of deposit turnover 11.4 -14 9 Bank debits (thousands) .. .. ........ $ 7,038 -30 End-of-month dePQSits (thousands)t . . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 7,874 10.8 -26 GRANBURY Postal receipts" (pop. 2,227) .... $ 4,800 - 1 1 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 2,780 -15 9 FORT STOCKTON (pop. 6,373 ') Postal receipts• ....... ......... .. .. $ 7,997 -19 -29 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 3,715 8.7 -- 6 11 22 -14 Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 118,000 9,772 9,950 11.8 84 -15 1 -13 427 19 13 5 GREENVILLE (pop. 22,134 ') Postal rece:pts• ............ $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ..... $ 49,902 383,500 30,683 50 -20 -58 17 End-of-month deposits (thousands )t .. $ 23,145 22 FREDERICKSBURG (pop. 4,629) Postal receipts• .... ..... . ...... . ... $ 11,866 25 32 Annual rate of deposit turnover Nonfarm placements ............... . 16.4 174 4 37 - 2 26 Building permits, less federal contract.s $ Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 51,750 12,152 -16 -32 - 1 11 HALLETTSVILLE (pop. 2,808) End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 10,642 2 3 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 4,450 -97 -91 Annual rate of deposit turnover 13.9 -29 8 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 3,617 -13 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 7,111 - 1 5 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 6.1 - 12 3 FRIONA (pop. 3,149 ') Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 244,500 13,487 6,556 24.2 409 -33 -4 -28 168 60 13 41 HALLSVILLE (pop. 1,015 ') Bank debits (thousands) .. .... . ..... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover 1,048 1,368 9.5 -22 8 -25 -36 -45 -10 GATESVILLE (pop. 5,180 ') HASKELL (pop. 4,016) Postal receipts• ........ . ......... · · $ 9,152 11 48 Building permits, less federal contracts 59,450 85 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 7,519 -13 18 Bank debits (thousands) ... ...... ... $ 4,470 -27 18 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 8,204 10.8 3 -11 18.. End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ... 5,744 8.8 -12 -25 4 11 GEORGETOWN (pop. 5,218) Postal receipts• ... ..... ... .. ... . ... $ Bank debits (thousands) .... .. .. .. . . $ End-of-month dePQSits (thousands)t .. $ 8,622 6,414 8,027 -22 8 HENDERSON (pop. 11,477 ') P ostal receipts• ...... · .. . $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ..... . ... .. . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands )t .. $ 17,033 61,200 13,102 17 ,144 13 -45 -24 -2 -3 -34 13 14 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 9.1 - 21 For an explanation of symbols see p. 114. 125 APRIL 1969 Percent change Percent change Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb from from Feb from from City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 HEREFORD (pop. 9,584 ') Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... $ 18,482 17 -10 LAMESA (pop. 12,438) Building permits, less federal contracts $ 206,200 Postal receipts• .................... $ 16,059 11 -27 45 Bank debits (thousands) ..... . ...... $ 34,002 -26 19 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 14,950 65 -16 Bank debits (thousands) . . ... . ...... $ 25,163 -37 23End-of-month deposits (thousands)1: .. $ 18,828 -4 12 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 22,634 -11 22 Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . 12.6 -34 -2 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 21.3 -21 8 HONDO (pop. 4,992) Nonfarm placements ............... . 81 29 17 Building permits, less federal contracts 182,195 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 4,163 -14 14 LAMPASAS (pop. 5,670 ') End-of-month deposits (thousands)1: .. $ 4,413 3 6 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 11.2 12 8 Postal receipts• .......... . ... . ..... $ 7,652 25 -15 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 51,000 14 85 HUNTSVILLE (pop. 11,999) Bank debits (thousands) .... .. ...... $ 8,248 -24 20Postal receipts• . . . $ 21,746 -12 End-of-month deposits (thousands)1: .. $ 8,254 13Building permits, less federal contracts $ 66,900 -40 45 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 12.0 -23 9Bank debits (thousands) ......... . .. $ 18,132 21 End-of-month deposits (thousands)1: .. $ 14,819 LEVELLAND (pop. 12,073 ') Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . 14.2 14 Postal receipts• .................... $ 16,916 -16 45 JACKSONVILLE (pop. 10,509 ' ) Building permits, less federal contracts $ 36,250 -60 -71 Postal receipts"' . . . . . . $ 30,376 13 23 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 82,400 95 396 Bank debits (thousands) ..... . . . .... $ 17,461 -45 -2 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 19,037 -10 44 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . ........ $ 19,222 13 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 10.4 -37 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 12,982 8 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 17.7 11 LITTLEFIELD (pop. 7,236) JASPER (pop. 5,120 ') Postal receipts• .................... $ 14,403 -3 Postal receipts• .................... $ 9,932 9 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 106,143 -32 124 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 87,200 Bank debits (thousands) .. . ......... $ 17,661 34 Bank debits (thousands) .. . ...... . .. $ 10,176 -38 -9 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 10,950 2 15 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ . . $ 10,882 -7 Annual rate of deposit turnover 19.5 7 16 Annual rate of deposit turnover 10.8 -36 -12 JUNCTION (pop. 2,514 ') Building permits, less federal contracts $ 2,200 80 93 LLANO (pop. 2,656) Bank debits (thousands) . . . . .. $ 2,299 -20 Postal receipts• .................... $ 4,436 14 26 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 4,025 10 10 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 8,440 41 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 6.5 -18 7 Bank debits (thousands) ..... . .... .. $ 3,843 -24 5 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 4,359 -3 KARNES CITY (pop. 3,000 ') Building permits, less tederal contracts $ 2,500 268 25 Annual rate of deposit turnover 10.4 -20 Bank debits (thousands) $ 4,226 4 29 End-of-month depo3its (thouS>nds)+ .. $ 4,346 6 LOCKHART (pop. 6,084) Annual rate of depo3it turnover 11.3 22 Postal receipts• .. . . .. ... . . . ... . .... $ 6,711 15 KILGORE (pop. 10,500 '), Building permits, less federal contracts $ 41,533 76 -45 Postal receipts* . . . . . . . . . . . $ 18,335 11 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 6,233 -22 •• Building permits, less federal contracts $ 47,850 53 32 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ . . $ 8,376 12 Bank debits (thousands) . ....... . ... $ 14,188 17 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 9.0 -18 -8 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 15,296 1 16 Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. 11.1 17 8 LONGVIEW (pop. 52,242 ') Nonfarm employment (area) c 35,000 .. 5 Postal receipts• . . ................. . $ 85,224 -5 Manufacturing employment (area) c 10,080 14 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,369,500 53 46 Percent unemployment (area) c ..... 2.2 12 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 87,415 -28 11 KILLEEN (pop. 30,400 ') End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 50,318 -3 12 Postal receipts• . . ... .. .... $ 65,748 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... -27 -2 20.5 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 435,798 -21 Nonfarm employment (area) c 35,000 .. 5 Bank debits (thousands) .......... . . $ 32,361 .. 73 Manufacturing employment (area) c 10,080 .. 14 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 14,830 19 Percent unemployment (area) c 2.2 -12 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 26.8 -1 49 KINGSLAND (pop. 1,200 ') LUFKIN (pop. 20,756 ') Postal receipts* ..... $ 2,826 87 53 Postal receipts• . . . . . ... . . . . . ...... . $ 43,185 10 Bank debits (thousands) . . .. $ 2,267 -23 24 Building :permits, less federal contracts $ 660,405 357 -22 End-of-'month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 1,608 -4 12 7 Nonfarm placements .... ... ........ . 65 -3 Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. 16.5 24 -31 KINGSVILLE (pop. 31,160 ') McCAMEY (pop. 3,375 ') Postal receipts* . . . . ... .. ..... $ 34,267 20 8 Postal receipts• ...... . ..... . . . ... . . $ 4,141 30 ll Building permits, less federal contracts $ 214,175 -49 -26 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 2,374 6 18 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . .. . $ 17 ,352 -21 13 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 2,047End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ . . $ 20,255 4 11 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 13.5 8Annual rate of deposit turnover . . .. 10.5 -22 KIRBYVILLE (pop. 2,021 ') MARBLE FALLS (pop. 2,161) Postal receipts* ...... . .... . ........ $ 5,429 17 16 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 46,500 Bank debits (thousands) ... $ 2,737 10 18 Bank debits (thousands) . ........... $ 3,092 -27 18 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 4,840 18 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 3,544 6 27Annual rate of deposit turnover ... 6.8 8 Annual rate of deposit turnover 10.8 -28 -7For an explanation of symbols see p. 114. 126 TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Local Business Conditions Percent change Local Business Conditions Percent change Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb 1969 Feb from from Feb from fromCity and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 MARSHALL (pop. 29,445 ') PALESTINE (pop. 13,954 ' ) Postal receipts• .... . .......... .. . .. $ 39,608 .. .. Postal receipts• ...... . .. .... .... ... $ ·18,574 -7 8 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 410,426 90 -37 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 68,905 57 -35 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 29,820 28 Bank debits (thousands) . . .... . .... . $ 16,670 -11 18 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 31,048 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 19,849 1 10 Annual rate of deposit turnover 11.2 2 19 Annual rate of deposit turnover 10.1 -11 Nonfarm placements .. 261 3 18 Nonfarm placements 44 ... .. . MEXIA (pop. 7,621 ') PAMPA (pop. 24,664) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... $ 8,214 -5 -4 Retail sales -5t -15 -14Building permits, less federal contracts $ 52,000 1 -19 Automotive stores -2t -15 -16Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . .. . . ... $ 6,838 -22 17 Postal receipts• .... .. .. .. . $ 32,744 -3 9 End-of-month deposits (thousandsH .. $ 7,055 -1 14 Bank debits (thousands) . . . ..... $ 29,210 -27 2Annual rate of deposit turnover 11.6 -22 5 End-of-month deposits (thousands); .. $ 22,241 -8 Annual rate of deposit turnover .. .. 15.1 -24 MINERAL WELLS (pop. 11,053) Nonfarm placements 111 37 11 Postal receipts• .. . . ....... $ 32,210 3 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 82,185 -36 -84 PARIS (pop. 20,977) Bank debits (thous2nds) ... . . . . ..... $ 26,650 8 13 Postal receipts• . . . . .. . ... . .. . $ 39,367 20 15End-of-month deposits (tho~S>nds)t .. $ 17,296 7 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,014,496 403 115 Annual rate of deposit turnover .. 18.6 4 Nonfarm placements . . . . 155 18 -24Nonfarm placements 126 66 9 MONAHANS (pop. 9,476 ') PECOS (pop. 13,479 ') Postal receipts• . . . . .......... . .... $ 10,690 -10 Postal receipts• .. . . $ 12,510 -20 -13 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 65,750 36 Bank debits (thousands) ........... $ 22,014 -21 14 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . $ 13,087 22 End-of-month deposits (thousands); .. $ 13,405 -2 21 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 19.5 -18 Nonfarm placements 74 6 16 MOUNT PLEASANT (pop. 8,027) Postal receipts• ......... .. $ 12,878 4 PLAINVIEW (pop. 21, 703 ') Building permits, less federal contracts $ 31,100 -78 -38 Postal receipts• .... .. .............. $ 35,818 -10 -9 Bank debits (thous2nds) ..... $ 17,559 -8 24 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,128,500 401 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 10,003 3 Bank debits (thousands) ... ....... . . $ 47,618 -38 Annual rate of deposit turnover 21.0 .. 27 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . . $ 28,309 -8 -2 Annual rate of deposit turnover . ... 19.3 -33 -3 MUENSTER (pop. 1,190) Nonfarm placements 191 52 -11 Postal receipts* ............. .. $ 2,984 41 32 Building ]>E!rmits, less federal contracts $ 0 PLEASANTON (pop. 5,053 ') End-of-month deposits (thousands)t $ 8,506 11 Bank debits (thot:sands) . $ 2,630 -29 9 Building permits. less federal contracts $ 68,300 358 92 End-of-m: nth depo3its (thousands)t $ 2,675 12 Bank debits (thousands) ......... .. . $ 4,635 -29 14 Annual rate of deposit turnover ... 12.4 -29 5 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 4,488 -1 Annual rate of deposit turnover 12.3 -26 12 MULESHOE (pop. 4,945 ') Bank debits (thot:sant!s) . . . $ 11,941 -44 -1 QUANAH (pop. 4,570 ') End-of-month depo3its (thousands); .. $ 12,487 -9 39 Postal receipts• ... $ 4,482 -13 -17 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 10.9 -44 -30 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 0 Bank debits (thousands) .. . . . ... . .. . $ 5,832 -26 21 NACOGDOCHES (pop. 18,076 ') End-of-month deposits (thousands); .. $ 6,184 -3 1 Postal receipts• ..... .. ......... . . .. $ 37,169 17 24 Annual rate of deposit turnover .. .. 11.1 -23 17 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 380,656 61 78 Nonfarm placemer.ts 112 -4 -23 RAYMONDVILLE (pop. 9,385) NEW BRAUNFELS (pop. 15,631) Postal receipts• . . ... . ........... .. . $ 10,570 27 10 Postal receipts* .... ............ .... $ 29,348 19 Building permits, less federal contract.s $ 5,400 -69 -86 Building permits, less federal contr~ct.s $ 355,913 18 -61 Bank debits (thous2nds) . $ 8,062 9 7 Bank debits (thousands) ..... S 17,951 -21 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 10,019 -3 -10 End-cf-mcnth ~eposits (thousands)t .. $ 19,233 -1 23 Annual rate of deposit turnover .. 9.5 -4 19 Annual rate of deposit turnover 11.1 -20 -13 Nonfarm placements 47 -16 -40 NIXON (pop. 1,751) REFUGIO (pop. 4,944) Postal receipts• $ 1,074 -26 Postal receipts* . . ..... $ 4,843 -9 -7 Bui1ding permits, less federal contracts $ 40,500 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 0 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . $ 2,282 -1 11 Bank debits (thousands) ... $ 3,897 -25 -6 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t . $ 1,878 -10 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 8,582 -2 -11 Annual rate of deposit turnover 13.8 5 Annual rate of deposit turnover 5.4 -22 OLNEY (pop. 4,200 ') ROCKDALE (pop. 4,481) Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) . $ 5,096 -26 15 Postal receipts• ... .. . ..... .. ... . ... $ 7,291 21 17 -2 Bank debits (thousands) ........ . .. . $ 6,924 29 End-of-mcnth deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 4,864 -1 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ .. $ 5,724 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. 14.4 14 For an explanation of symbols see p. 114. Annual rate of deposit turnover . . .. 12.5 -24 18 APRIL 1969 Percent changePercent change Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions Feb 1969 Feb 1969Feb 19S9 Feb 19S9 Feb from fromFeb from from Jan 1969 City and item 19S9 Jan 19S9 Feb 19S8 City and item 1969 Feb 1968 TAHOKA (pop. 3,600 ')SAN MARCOS (pop. 17,500 ') Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,800 -98 Postal receipts* . . . ................. $ 19,8Sl -10 9 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ s,741 -46 12 Bank debits (thousands) .. . . . ....... $ 19,82S 2 lS End-of-month deposits (thousands):I .. $ 8,SSO -6 12 End-of-month deposits (thousands):I . . $ 14,114 4 13 .. Annual rate of deposit turnover 7.8 -44Annual rate of deposit turnover lS.5 2 11 TAYLOR (pop. 9,434)SAN SABA (pop. 2, 728) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . ...... ... $ 11,320 -1 -14 Postal receipts• ........... .. ....... $ 4,S40 38 -s Building permits, less federal contracts $ lOS,060 -29 603 Bank debits (thousands) ... ......... $ S,82S Sl Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 12,380 -16 22 End-of-month deposits (thousands):I .. $ S,21S 2 21 End-of-month deposits (thousands):I . . $ 23,22S •• 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover 13.0 2S Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. . 6.4 -lS 8 Nonfarm placements ...... ..... .. . . 24 85 SILSBEE (pop. 8,44 7 ') Bank debits (thousands) . ... . ....... $ 10,4S2 TEMPLE (pop. 34,730 ') End-of-month deposits (thousands):I . . $ 8,777 9 Retail sales ...... . ....... .... . . . .. . st 4 18 Annual rate of deposit turnover .. . . 13.S 3 Furniture and household- appliance stores .......... .. .. . St -2 SMITHVILLE (pop. 2,935 ') Postal receipts• 72,277 16 22 Building permits, less federal contracts $ S49,338 -42 106 Postal receipts* ................... . $ 3,1S2 -10 11 Bank debits (thousands) .......... . . 44,494 -23 13 Building permits, less federal contracts $ l,SSO -48 Nonfarm placements ........... . .. . 200 -3 7 Bank debits (thousands) , ......... . . $ 2,103 -4S 31 End-of-month deposits (thousands):I .. $ 2,9S7 -3 lS Annual rate of deposit turnover 8.4 -41 11 UVALDE (pop. 14,000 ') Postal receipts• .............. .. .... $ 14,37S -26 -29 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1S9,S63 16 SNYDER (pop. 13,850) Bank debits (thousands) ... . . . ...... $ l 7,S78 -lS 21 Postal receipts• ........ . .. .. .. . .... $ lS,011 -10 18 End-of-month deposits (thousands )t .. $ 10,882 6 Building permits, less federal contracts $ S8,200 S9 -30 Annual rate of deposit turnover 19.0 -13 17 Bank debits (thousands) . . ...... . ... $ 14,172 -3S -lS End-of-month deposits (thousands):I .. $ 20,189 -s 17 VERNON (pop. 13,385 ') Annual rate of deposit turnover 8.2 -34 -2S Building permits, less federal contracts $ 43,600 -77 -39 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 20,703 -28 17 SONORA (pop. 2,619) End-of-month deposits (thousands):I .. $ 24,198 -3 3 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 2,700 -4S Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . 10.1 -26 11 Bank debits (thousands) .. . .. .... .. . $ 2,793 -19 1 Nonfarm placements .... . . ... ... .. . 72 -12 -9 End-of-month deposits (thousands):I .. $ 4,S38 8 9 Annual rate of deposit turnover . .. . 7.1 -12 VICTORIA (pop. 37,000 ') Retaii saJes ................... . .. . . -St -8 STEPHENVILLE (pop. 7359) Postal receipts• ........... ... ..... $ 60,3S4 -6 - Building permits, less federal contracts $ 242,9SO -44 11 Postal receipts• .. . ..... .. ..... $ 1S,3S8 11 Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 80,321 -17 7 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 9S,67S -3 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 48,SSO -79 lS Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . $ 12,8S3 -13 34 Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . 9.9 -lS End-of-month deposits (thousands):I .. $ 11,808 s 1 Nonfarm placements ... ..... . . ... . 493 13 11 Annual rate of deposit; turnover . .. 12.7 -11 2S Weatherford (pop. 9, 759) Postal receipts• ....... . ............ $ 17,287 -s 12 STRATFORD (pop. 2,500 r) Postal receipts.;. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,817 -12 -9 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 32,0SO -S8 -58 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 0 .. End-of-month deposits (thousands):I .. $ 18,072 Bank debits (thousands) . . .... . ..... $ ll,6S7 -22 26 End-of-month deposits (thousands):I .. $ S,886 -11 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 22.4 -17 20 U E H 1 Ii AND.r.; VALLEY Willacy, and Hida' p 0 • SULPHUR SPRINGS (pop. 12,158 ') Retail sales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . St -13 Postal receipts• .................... $ 26,130 11 s Apparel stores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . -20t -14 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 468,400 342 94 Automotive stores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2t -13 Bank debits (thousands) . $ 21,8S3 12 Drugstores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . st 6 End-of-month deposits (thousands):I .. $ 17,610 s Food stores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . St -7 Annual rate of deposit turnover .. . . lS.O 7 Furniture and household-appliance stores ... . .......... . 6t -29 -18 Gasoline and service stations .... . 3t -6 SWEETWATER (pop. 13,914) 2 General-merchandise stores 9t -10 -9 Postal receipts* . . . . . . . 13,747 -4 -42 Lumber, building-material, Building permits, less federal contracts $ 6,100 -92 93 and hardware dealers ........ . -20 2t -17 Bank debits (thousands) . ........... $ 14,948 -33 3 Postal receipts• ... . . ....... . .. .... . End-of-month deposits (thousands):I .. $ 11,810 12 17 Building permits, less federal contracts -19 -Sl Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 14.2 33 Bank debits (thousands) .... 9 14 Nonfarm placements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 24 -24 End-of-month deposits (thousands):I .. 2 Annual rate of deposit turnover 16.S lSFor an explanation of symbols see p. 114. 128 TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW B:AROMETERS OF TEXAS BUSINESS (All figures are for Texas unless otherwise indicated.) !111 indexes are. based on the average .m~nths for 1957-19~9 except where other specification is made ; all except annual mdexes are adJuste~ f?r s~asonal var.1at10~ unless otherwise noted. Employment estimates are compiled by the Texas Employment Co~m1ss1on m .c?OP~rat10n ~1t~ the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor. The sym­bols used below impose quahf!cat1ons as md1cated here : •-preliminary data subject to revision; r-revised data; #­dollar totals for the calendar year to date; §-dollar totals for the fiscal year to date; t-employment data for wage and salary workers only. Year-to-date ave rage Feb Jan Feb 1969 1969 1968 1969 1968 GENERAL BUSINESS ACTIVITY Texas business activity (index) ---------·· --·----·--·---·--------------------------­242.6 • 252.0 • 211.4 247.3 211.3 Wholesale prices in U.S. (unadjusted index) ---·-----------·---·-------·---­111.0 • 110.7 • 108.0 110.9 107.6 Consumer prices in U.S. (unadjusted index) ·------------------------------­124.6 124.1 119.0 124.4 118.8 Income payments to individuals in U.S. (billions, at seasonally adjusted annual rate) ____ ---------------------------------------$ 721.4 • $ 716.l • $ 663.0 ' $ 718.8 $ 659.0 Business failures Cnumber) ------------· ---· _----------------------------------------23 24 37 24 41 Business failures (liabilities, thousands) _______ --------------------------------$10,736 $ 1,816 $ 2,634 $ 6,276 $ 3,626 TRADE Ratio of credit sales to net sales in department and apparel stores ---------------------------------------------------------------------------­58.3 • 60.8 . 59.9' 59.6 60.7 Ratio of collections to outstandings in department and apparel stores -------------------------------------------------·---------------·---·--------26.9 . 29.8 . 27.8' 28.4 29.2 PRODUCTION Total electric-power use Cindex) ____ --------------------------·--------------------236.7 • 232.9 • 213.0' 234.8 212.3 Industrial electric-power use Cindexl -------·-----------------------------------­224.4 . 213.6 • 196.7 ' 219.0 192.8 Crude-oil production (index) -----------__ --------------------------------­100.7 • 105.7 • 117.4' 103.2 114.8 Average daily production per oil well Cbbl.) -------------------------------­14.6 15.0 16.1 14.8 15.9 Crude-oil runs to stills Cindex) -----------·--------------------------------------------130.2 121.7 133.7 126.0 131.0 Industrial production in U.S. (index) _________ --------------------------------169.5 • 169.1 • 162.0 ' 169.3 161.6 Texas industrial production-total Cindexl -----------------------------------­168.5 • 167 .4 • 164.4' 168.0 163.1 Texas industrial production-total manufactures Cindex) ---------­193.8 • 190.7 • 181.3 ' 192.3 180.8 Texas industrial production-durable manufactures Cindex) ---­213.4 • 212.6 • 193.4 ' 213.0 193.7 Texas industrial production-nondurable manufactures (index) 180.7 • 176.2 • 173.3' 178.5 172.2 Texas industrial production-mining (index) -------------------------------­119.2 • 120.8 • 130.6' 120.0 128.0 Texas industrial production-utilities 1:1:1 c::: ~ Cl en i:'1 ..., ::a c:: t".1 .z z > ..., < C i:'1 i:'1 ::<1 ~ en 0 > l'%j en ..., ~ 1:1:1 ~ 0 Cl ~ Ul ..., "' "" ...... i:'1 z ~ t".1 > Ul Ul 00 ...,> ::a t>=:l > c:: Ul en t".1 ..., > z ::a (j ::i:: en ::<1 i:'1 i:'1 ..., 0 0 c:: z ::<1 ti z 6 ::<1 r M > D 00 en c::: M '" C'l M '" .... ti ...,> > c:: en ~ ..., M > ~ 00 DIRECTORY OF TEXAS MANUFACTURERS The nineteenth revision of a very useful tool for all those interested in the status of industry in Texas is now off the presses. In it over 10,900 Texas manufactur­ers are cross-indexed by name, by location, and by prod­ucts. The 1969 Directory of Texas Manufacturers repre­sents a complete revision of the previous edition. Part I, a complete alphabetical section, lists firms by name, with their home offices. Part II, an alphabetical list of manu­facturing plants by cities, indicates the products made by each firm, the approximate number of employees, and the distribution of its products. This section also provides accurate, up-to-date addresses, names of proprietors or executives, and the year each firm was founded. In Part III the plants are listed according to products manufac­tured as classified by the Standard Industrial Classifica­tion. The Directory contains also a list of Texas counties in which manufacturing plants are located and an alpha­betical index of products. Twentieth edition. 1969. 783 pp. $20.00. Texas residents pay 4-percent sales tax. BUREAU OF BUSINESS RESEARCH THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN