View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

6·2 ----- · - --· - --- --·----'·-'·-- --------=--=
·=c-:- ·--=


=-------=-=- -

~ ~ -~~

7___, ... 1951
... .J. March
- -.
-- .



Federal Reser"{e Ban..l.c of Dallas
C 0 T T 0 N·
It was annO'Uilced this weel<:.. tliatthe"Cotton exchanges will reopen on
Thursday, March 8. Trade spokesmen_ have. indicated that they are resuming trade
with re1uctance as ·they are st:ill doubtful that f!ontrols on raw cotton p:ric~s · can
be applied successfully. The lates.t control order affecting cotton prices places
control on prices at ~vhich individual cotton grades a~e to be sold by all members
of the trade, vdth dtfferentials for location~ and differs from the original order
which placed limits on prices at whieh individual cotton traders could sell.
The PM.A reported a lj ght volw:te of t,rading in cott(jn in the Southwest
last week i:J'i th prices ranging as high as 150 poim~aoove · those prevailing on January 26, the la.s t date cotton excrLanges yre1·e open.
The parity price fo:r cotton at mid-February was 33.11 cents per pound,
compared with ,;2.98 a month earlier and 29,88 a year ago. The rise 1n parity price
is signif'ica.nt because of its relationship to support prices. Hmv-ever, with market
prices of cotton so fa ·r above parity, the real importance of suppo~~ prices in 19)1
is somewhat in doubt.
Cotton :el~1~~ng is underway in the Rio Grande Valley, principally :Ln the
irrigated· section. Yost of the dry-land acreage needs moisture before planting can
be done. In the Abilene and Lubbock sections preparations for the 1951 crop are
making good progress and, according to reports, the acreae;e vrill be increased substantially.

Prices of e;rains on the Fort Worth Grain and Cotton Exchange declined
during the "pa'°S'rweek. Trade reports indtcate that the weakening of grain prices on
t."~is and other markets reflects an uneasiness re1ative to pPnding developments in
th ~· Big FoLLr meeting iri Paris.
It is said that if the V!est crn Powers and Russia
sl-~0uld reach some· accord., grain prices may slump further.
On the local level the
market influence of the impl'·oved moisture situation in t}le vrinter wheat belt was
offset by reports of green bng and cutworm damage t o the wh e::i.t crop in Oklahoma.•
Tuesday's top g:--ain pri6es on the Fort n orth r:ia:cke .J. , : No. 1 hard wheat,
~ 2.G0-1/4; No. 2 £§1-rlez, l':.i. 79; No. 2 white 9ats, c? l.19 ·~~/L~. ; ~J o. 2 y;;llow
~~L 96-1/4 per bushel; and No. 2 yellow mi1o ( sorghurns), c1'!.2 . 57 per c ~rt.
These prices
al''c from 1 to 5 cents under a week earJ.Ier:° No. 2 white corn sold Tuesday for a
top price of $2.26-3/h per bushel, or 2-1/2 cents over a week ago.
The USDA announced that the maturity date of CCC price support loans on
certain 1950-crop grains will not be extended beyond theannour1cedffiaturi ty dates,
'ivbich are March Jl, 19Sl f or sorghum and April 30, 1951 for wheat, oats, barley, and rye.
Rice marJ.rets were quiet cluring the week ended Februa .~J ?6, accor ,~ ing to
the USDA, ri tri mi1Jers a'1d dis -l~ ri bu tors av;ai ting the announcement of definite price
ceilings before mat ing i.nportant a dditional commitments. P12:2._~ held at about the
level of recent weeks.



L I VE S T 0 C K
Prices of hogs and J RmbS"ci1 the Fort Worth market made little net chanbe t he pc:rnt week, wh-i le p r ·l. ccs of co.ttle declj ned. There have be e n rPports that
hcmsewive3 are rebellin.P' ci gaj_ns t ldgh b ef!f pri~es and that this resist t.l nce is being
felt at the livestock markets.

Tuesdayr s top price for hogs was $21. 75, 11nchanr.:ed from a week ago. Wooled
lambs brought ~~38. 00, likewise unchanged.
Slaughter cattle prices: steers, ~~ 36~00; heifers, 4US.OO; and cows, $27.00
per cwt~, off $1. 00 each. Slaughte1'."-calves at 5$35 .. OO"Were-riovm 50 cents, while
f~] de2:, 9-nd stock~.!. _?te~ at ~;; 38. 00 were-dovm $3 .. 00 from la3t weekt s top pricee
Prices of g o~ts on the San Antonio market were steady to strong last week,
Some Medium and Good Angoras in the hair brought '. ~20.00 per cwt, A few f)panish and
Angora kids sold as high as $7.75 per head.
V! 0 0 L
A N D M0 H A I R
Bus:i.ness in the B'OSt'Onv.fool rna_r_-ke-t-1ast ·neek was generally in scoured
woolen wools of domestic and foreign orfgin .for r.:overnment orders. Dealers continued
to wait for some clarification of the price control orders which would allow trading
in civilian ~ools.
A ver>J small auanti ty of Ord:i.nary 12-months ':Cexas wool was reported contracted in a range of f;rease prices from ~n. 25 to ~L J..i.Sper· pound_, Business in
m0hair remained stagnant~
i!foo1 production in Texas yea.r totaled 52, 686,000 po11nds, or 1% ·more
than in 19~according to···the BAE, There were 6,886,coo sheep shorn with an
average weight of 7~7 pounds per fleece .. Farmers and ranchers of the State received
~33, 7J 9,000 from the sale of vrnol in 1950, O"'.' more than in any year since 19h3 ..
Pounds of wool produced in other Southwestern sta.tes in 1950 with percentage changes from 19h~Louisiana, 40~000, - up 7%; Oklihoma, ~927 )ooo, up 20%;
Arizona, 2,651,000, down 1%; and N0w Mexico, 10,626,000, off slightly.
Mohair p·~oduct.ion in the 7 leadj_ng st;:i.tes in 1950 is estimated at
14,561,ooopouncts~-the-s:TiaJ:1est clip s :Cnce-I927~but only sli;Yhtly less than that
produced in 1%9.. Ariz(,:na, Oregon, anri Utah were the only states showing an increased
production in 19.SO., ·-pi:'vdiJ-ction
Texas, the leading mohair state, was the smallest
since 1937. F'ewer goats were clippsd in· Texas, al t hough the weight of mohair per
goat at 5(:h pounds was the highest on record .for the State. In New Mexico and California the 1950 clip was the smallest on rec·ord, starting with 1909 .. - - - --The valt·te of produ c~ed in the U. S ~ in 19~)0 arno1mted to t;~ll, 01.i9, 000,
an increase of 6.::>·%-over-Is~9·; - Priceper pound moved up sharply in 1950 and averaged
75.9 cents, which is the highest on record and compares with 46.J cents in 191.i9.





The BAE index-of farm price8 in Texas on February 15 vms 392 percent (August 1909 - July 1914 = 100), compared with a 1935-39 average of 103 percent. This
means that Texas farm prices, as a r:,roup, are almost 4 times as high as before
World 1::.rar II; they are U+ percent a bove a year ago ..
The hi ~te st indexes are for wool, 702; meat animals, 573; truck crops,
471; oil bearing.crops, l_i68; cotton, 337; and dairy products, 27.5. By way of contrast the index of fruit prices, mostly citrus, is only Li7, and the index of potato
prices is 1790
The index of pric2s paid by U.S. farmers, including interest, taxes, and
farm wage rates' ·- :e.o seto-27 6 as- of f'E:"bruary·l5.-H'ip;her prices for food, fe P. der livestock, feed, and .building materials were primarily responsible for this risee
W. M. Pritchett
Agricultural Econcmist