Full text of Review (Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas) : July 1973

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

This publication was digitized and made available by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas' Historical Library (FedHistory@dal.frb.org)

International Finance-

Growing Need for Oil Imports Puts
Pressure on Balance of Payments

T~e ~nergy crisis shows no signs of
a atIng. And as high fuel prices
and s~ort supplies point up the
pressIng need for sharp increases in
fetrol eum imports, this crisis adds
urther to the nation's balance-ofPaYments problems and raises
threats of greater international
PaYments problems in the future.
b The nation's difficulties with its
alance of payments have been
chronic since long before oil imPorts became important either to

the nation's payments position or
to its energy needs. The nation
has run a payments deficit almost
every year since 1950.
In recent years, these deficits
have deepened sharply. In 1971,
for example, the deficit soared to
a record $29.8 billion on an official
settlements basis. While most of
that deficit resulted from speculative runs against the dollar, some
of it was due to a deficit new to
Americans-a deficit in trade.

N'ation moves from easy surplus in energy
to a growing deficit made up by imports
QUADRILLION BTU 'S
70 ________________________________________

60_

50 _

40 _

<0
10

'35

'40

SOURCE: U.s. Bureau ot Mines

......
!lUs'

Iness Review I July 1973

'45

'50

'55

'60

'65

~-----

Although the official settlements
deficit was reduced to $10.3 billion
in 1972, the deficit in the trade balance continued to rise, reaching
$6.8 billion. That was more than
twice the deficit in 1971 and larger
than all but two of the surpluses
built up in the postwar years.
With realignments in exchange
rates after further runs on the dollar this year, there are indications
that the nation's balances of trade
and payments may show improvements in 1973. The increase in
prices of foreign-made goods sold
in this country could discourage
imports, while the decrease in
prices of U.S. goods sold abroad
could encourage exports.
But in the case of oil and gas, it
is becoming increasingly clear that
the nation, at least in the near
term, will be forced to rely more
and more on imports-almost regardless of their price-to close the
gap between domestic production
of oil and gas and the relentless
demand for energy. And unless
exports of other American goods
increase enough to offset the expected rise in oil and gas imports,
the nation's balance-of-payments
position could deteriorate rapidly.
Growing need for imports
The nation's dependence on imports of oil and gas has been increasing for some time. Not since
the early 1950's, in fact, has domestic production of energy exceeded
consumption. And even though net
imports never accounted for more
than 6 percent of consumption in
the 1950's, their proportion increased steadily over t he decade.
With the sharp buildup in demand beginning in the 1960's, the
1

ply. And each set provides a different outlook.
.
The most favorable projection IS
based on four assumptions:
• Minimum restrictions on suppliers of energy becaus~ of controversies over the envIronment
• Ready availability of federal land
for leasing
• Strong incentives to increa~e
oil exploration and productIOn
• Improvements in the ratio of
successes in exploration
.
The least favorable projection IS
based on three converse assumptions:
• Continuation of environmental
constraints
.
• Restrictive Government pOliCIes
• Even poorer exploration results
than now
The two intermediate assumptions, being neither optimisti~ ~or
pessimistic about problems limIting the domestic supply of petroleum, differ from the other two
only in assumptions about exploration successes and the early start' 55
' 60
'65
'70
' 75
up of nuclear plants, which would
help reduce the demand for pe~r?­
leum used in generating electncity.
If conditions of the most favorable projection are met, domestic
As this trend continues and the
production of oil and gas is exnation becomes increasingly depen- pected to rise about three-fifths
dent on petroleum as the primary
by 1985. Domestic supplies of other
source of energy, consumption is
energy could more than double.
expected to rise even faster, showEven in this most optimistic
ing an average annual growth rate
case, however, the nation will have
over the next 15 years of 4.2 perto increase its imports of oil and
cent, compared with 3.6 percent
gas to meet the projected increase
in the past 15 years. How well doin demand. With the gains made
mestic producers are able to supin expanding other energy sou~ces,
ply this growing need will depend
imports will have become relatIvely
on several factors.
less important by 1985. The volTo project the extent to which
ume of foreign shipments, however,
the nation may have to look to
will have continued to rise, reachimports to make up its deficiency
ing a level by the end of the period
in domestic production, the Natwo-thirds higher than in 1970.
tional Petroleum Council has proAt the other extreme, where the
jected estimates of energy supply
a, sumptions are the most limiting,
s
conditions in the United States to
domestic production of oil and gas
1985. Four sets of assumptions
will have actually declined. And
were used in projecting the supalthough other energy sources will,

More costly refined products account
for growing proportion of oil imports
MILLION BARRELS

1,500

1,000 -

'3 0

' 35

'4 0

'45

'5 0

SOURCE: U,S, Bureau of Mines

gap between consumption and production widened still further until
imports accounted for about 11
percent of the energy used in 1970.
This growth in demand was pretty
much to be expected in an industrial economy with a high, and still
rising, standard of living. And with
the persistence of the rise in demand, any efforts now to slow the
rise could, at best, be made effective only over considerable time.
Even if new policies succeed in
spurring growth in domestic production, the gap cannot be narrowed anytime soon. The only immediate recourse is an increase in
purchases of foreign petroleumeven though these purchases are
bound to weigh heavily on the balance of payments.
2

have been developed by 1985, these
alternatives will have come nowhere close to satisfying the de~and for energy. Imports will have
Ulcreased nearly sixfold by then,
a~d the proportion of energy supPlied through imports will have
been brought to 38 percent.
The actual outcome is apt to be
somewhere between these two ext~emes. But in any case, the nahon's reliance on energy from
abroad will have been increased
far beyond its current level.
t' In the near term, in fact, nalonal dependence on imports will
~Imost .certainly rise, regardless of
e policy decisions that might be
~ade. Because of the long lead
une required to mobilize energy
sUPPlies, the proportion of total
consumption furnished from
abroad will increase significantly
ur der either of these extreme sets
o assumptions.
di't!nder the most optimistic contlOns, wholly a fifth of the de~a~d in 1975 will have to be met
y lInports. And under the most
Pessimistic conditions, more than
a fo,!rth will be met by imports.
. ~lnce most of the effects of deCISIons made now will not be felt
until much later in the 1970's the
near- t erm effects on the balance of
'
p;yments will be largely a function
o the prices importers must pay.

drilling activity has increased substantially. But prices of gasoline
and other petroleum products have
been singled out for direct control
under Phase III.
Other factors, however, wholly
apart from domestic policies have
had significant influences on prices
of imported fuels. And some of
these influences will very probably
become even more significant as
the nation comes to rely more and
more on imported oil.
A recent agreement between oil
companies operating internationally and the principal producing
countries in North Africa and the
Middle East provides a case in
point. In response to the recent realignment in exchange rates and
the subsequent loss of revenue to
countries shipping oil to countries
that had devalued their curren-

cies, such as the United States, a
new agreement was reached, boosting the posted price of crude in
world markets by more than 30
cents a barrel.
Since taxes and royalties paid to
producing countries are based on
posted prices, this change means an
increase in the production costs to
oil companies of about 19 cents a
barrel. And while most of the oil
from these countries is consumed
in Europe and Japan, such changes
in crude prices are bound to have a
ripple effect throughout the world,
causing prices in the United States
to rise.
In the Western Hemisphere,
which has supplied most of the imports to the United States, prices
have already been raised in response to the devaluation of the
dollar. But with production in this

Extent of growth in petroleum imports
to depend on development of domestic reserves
QUADRILLION BTU'S

150

100 -

Outlook for fuel prices

~i~;nd ~as prices have long been
t e artIficially low in this counrY-and that largely explains the
~rrent energy crisis. From 1960
1970, for example, the wholes1
a e price index rose more than 16
percent. But pFices of crude petrothum and natural gas advanced less
P ~n 10 percent. And gasoline
3rIces at the refinery rose less than
Percent.
g To encourage the search for new
r: s reserves, the Government has
u C~ntlY taken steps to raise natra gas prices. And in response,
nUs'Uless Review I July 1973

50 -

O--~~ ES
B~~T~L:~~~~L--E~~~--~~~~-CONDITIONS
1975

1985

SOURCE: National Petroleum Council

3

reserves: So much of the world has
already been explored that a discovery of this magnitude is no
longer very probable.
Second, breaks came when demand was far less than now. Petroleum markets are so tight that anY
country with major new reserves
would doubtlessly follow the tax
and royalty patterns already established by exporting countries.
Another factor that must be expected to influence import price~
(and the balance of payments) IS
the cost of transportation. Tanker
rates are important components 0 f
the landed price of imports-and
they, too, have been rising.
Supertankers can be used to hold
back the rise in costs. But tanker
rates still depend largely on the
availability of ships, and with the
sharp rise in world oil shipments,
supertankers are in short supply.
New bottoms are being built
worldwide. Most of the activity in
ship construction is abroad, however, and many of the largest tankers already in operation are run
through foreign companies. As a
result, even though use of super- .
tankers will help hold down the nse
in import prices, most of the reliance on these ships will count
heavily against the U.S. balanceof-payments position.
face the uncertainties of currency
The prices domestic refiners paY
devaluations.
for imports will also depend-at
It is, in fact, the growing deleast in the short run-on the relapendence of consuming countries
tive scarcity of the types of crude
on these producing countries that
they need. Many refineries in the
probably poses the greatest poten- United States were built for the
tial upward pressure on world
low-sulfur crudes produced in this
crude prices. Such countries as
country. And these high-quality
Saudi Arabia and Kuwait have be- crudes-which are also the crudes
come especially important as their
most acceptable to environmentalmarket power has grown.
ists-are scarce in world markets.
There is always the possibility,
There is a limit, of course, to
of course, that world prices could
how high import prices can go bebreak-they have before. But there fore they encourage the use of fuel
are two reasons why such a develsubstitutes that are not now ecoopment is very unlikely today.
nomical. At current prices, which
First, prices have been broken
are still less than $3 a barrel, the
only by the discovery of vast new
ceiling set on imports by the costs

Nearly two-thirds of the world ' s proved oil reserves
in countries that import comparatively few goods

SOURCE: World Oil

hemisphere at its peak, growth in
imports will probably have to come
from North Africa and the Middle
East anyway. And producing
countries in these areas are under
no pressure to increase output to
meet the buildup in demand for
imports to the United States.
Already accounting for most of
the world's reserves, exporting
countries in Africa and the Middle East are amassing funds faster
than they can spend them. And
with prospects for world crude
prices to go even higher, some of
these countries would apparently
just as soon keep their oil in the
ground as expand production and
4

Growing claims on dollar pose
problems for increasing imports
BILLION DOLLARS
60_~~~

__________________

(END-OF-VEAR FIGURES)

50-

40_

30_

10 _

0-,
'55

'60

'65

'70

I
'75

SOURCE: Board of Governors,
Federal Reserve System

-~\other fuels is about $5 a barrel.
oththat price, development of such
er SOurces of fuel as oil shale
and t ar sands would become pract.
~al. Coal might also become more
olo~tant as an energy source if
~nces reached that level.
Co er~ again, however, time be!!l !!les Important. It would take
thany years to develop the use of
ese sUbstitutes.
llllpact on balance of payments

W'th
an~ both.the volume of imports

pares with estimated payments for
oil imports of $2.1 billion in 1970.
What happens in the near term,
then, will be largely the result of
policy decisions that have already
been reached. The outcome over
these next few years cannot be
greatly influenced by any efforts
made now to spur growth in domestic supplies.
In the longer run, however, current policies could have a significant influence on the nation's trade
balance. Net payments for fuel
imports could be trimmed to $7.5
billion by 1985. But if policies are
not initiated soon to achieve these
most optimistic conditions and the
most pessimistic conditions prevail, payments could balloon to
more than $30 billion by then.
Because of the possible reflow
of oil-generated funds from overseas, this trade deficit from oil
imports may overstate the impact
on the balance of payments. The
implications for policy are, nevertheless, clear. Not only must the
Government initiate efforts to
increase domestic exploration for
new oil and gas reserves and otherwise move to ensure that the
nation's most favorable supply
conditions are achieved. It must
also undertake policies to encourage expansion of export markets
for other goods that might have a
comparative advantage in world
trade. By encouraging exports, it
can obtain the added foreign exchange to help pay for the increase
in imports of oil and gas.
-Stephen L. Gardner

th the pnce of crude rising in
th e ~~ar term, the outlook is for
st:n ~ll for oil imports to rise subfor hally. It has been estimated,
bes::x~mple, that even under the
!!l a conditions, net U.S. paybirlits ~or fuel imports will be $9.5
con O~.1ll1975. Under the worst
$13 ~~?n.s, payments could reach
. IllIOn that year. This comnus'

Iness Review I July 1973

5

Urban Areas-

SMSA's Become More Important
In Economy of the Southwest
Ten standard metropolitan statistical areas in the Eleventh Federal
Reserve District have been redefined. The redefinitions, resulting
from an Office of Management and
Budget review of all the nation's
SMSA's, reflect the adoption of
new criteria for designating
SMSA's and population changes
shown in the 1970 Census of
Population.
The biggest change in the District was the merger of the Dallas
and Fort Worth SMSA's. With the
addition of three more counties
(Hood, Parker, and Wise), the new
SMSA has a population of nearly
2.4 million.
Previously, Dallas had ranked
sixteenth in population among the
nation's 269 SMSA's, and Fort
Worth had ranked forty-third. The
new Dallas-Fort Worth SMSA
ranks twelfth among 267 SMSA's.
That makes it larger than such
long-established metropolitan areas
as Baltimore, Cleveland, Houston,
Newark, and Minneapolis-St. Paul.
The Houston SMSA was also redefined to include Waller County.
With the redefinition of other
SMSA's across the country, however, Houston slipped from thirteenth to sixteenth place.
Five other Texas SMSA's were
also redefined. Callahan County
was added to the Abilene SMSA.
The Austin SMSA now includes
Hays County. Hardin County was
made part of the Beaumont-Port
Arthur-Orange SMSA. Comal
County was added to the San Antonio SMSA. And the Wichita
Falls SMSA gained Clay County
but lost Archer County.
In Louisiana, Webster Parish
was added to the Shreveport
6

SMSA. And Grant Parish, in the
Eleventh District, was added to the
Alexandria SMSA, which had previously lain entirely in the Sixth
Federal Reserve District.
The Texarkana, Texas-Arkansas
SMSA was renamed the Texarkana, Texas-Texarkana, Arkansas
SMSA. This area was expanded in
Arkansas to include Little River
County, the second Arkansas
county outside the Eleventh District to be included in the SMSA.
SMSA concept ...
The concept of an SMSA was developed originally for use by federal agencies in compiling economic
and social statistics, such as on
population, housing, industry, employment, and trade and for analyses of local housing and labor
markets. Agencies became aware
that they were not using the same
geographic areas in reporting metropolitan statistical data. Because
areas were not the same, the data
were not comparable.
Metropolitan districts, for example, were defined by the Census of
Population. Industrial districts
were used by the Census of Manufactures. And the Bureau of Employment Security reported its
statistics by labor market areas.
Clearly, a standard metropolitan
statistical area was needed.
In the late 1940's, the Government formed a committee to devise
a uniform basis for reporting metropolitan data. A set of criteria was
drawn up, defining SMSA's as
county areas having a central
city with a population of at least
50,000. The areas were to include
contiguous counties having economic and social relationships with

the central city that met explicit
standards for metropolitan character and integration.
Criteria defining SMSA's were
redefined in 1971. To meet the population criterion, it is no longer absolutely necessary for the central
city to have a population of 50,00 0.
Central cities as small as 25,000
meet the criterion if• Adjoining communities have a
population density of at least
1,000 people per square mile
• The communities form a single
economic and social unit
• The combined population of
contiguous communities is at
least 50,000
• The entire population of the
county (or counties) numbers
at least 75,000
Whether contiguous counties call
be included in an SMSA is determined by the composition of the
local labor force. Contiguous counties are added if as much as 75 percent of the resident labor force is
nonagricultural and as much as 30
percent is employed in the central
county (or counties).
A county can be added even if
it does not meet the employment
criterion, provided at least 75 percent of its workers are nonagricultural and the county meets two out
of the three criteria of metropolitan
character and one out of the three
criteria of integration.
The criteria of metropolitan
character are• A population at least 25 percent
urban
• A population increase of at least
15 percent between the two most
recent censuses
• A population density of at least
50 people per square mile

The criteria for integrating contiguous counties into an SMSA are• At least 15 percent of the work
force employed in the central
county (or counties)
• Employment of workers from the
central county (or counties)
equal to at least 15 percent of
the local employment
• A cOmmuting work force between
counties equal to 20 percent of
the employment in the outlying
county
... and its uses
The uniformity of procedures for
fl'eparing statistics on metropolian areas provides a body of information that is highly useful in com-

-

paring areas. And many important
economic decisions can be influenced by these comparisons.
Businesses, for example, often
use SMSA data in locating new facilities. Since the data help identify
markets, they are used in planning
advertising campaigns. Wage rates
and product prices are also sometimes differentiated by SMSA.
And the Government often uses
SMSA's in administering programs
and distributing financial assistance. Under the Emergency
School Aid Act of 1972, for instance, 5 percent of appropriations
for the program are reserved specifically for SMSA's. When several
local governments are involved in

mutual problems, definition of the
geographic area in terms of an
SMSA provides a convenient basis
for planning and coordination.
Development of SMSA's in the
Southwest mirrors the urbanization that can be seen nationwide.
Since 1950, the number of SMSA's
in the District has increased from
16 to 28. During that time, the
population in SMSA's in the District has increased from 3.8 million
to 8.9 million-a growth of 133 percent. Where little more than twofifths of the people in the five District states-Arizona, Louisiana,
New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas
-lived in SMSA's in 1950, nearly
two-thirds now live in SMSA's.

Eleventh District SMSA ' s expanded by net addition of 11 counties

p

..
---._-._--....:

----.!-----~

..:"". ..
•
.,"

•
............. ..............:

..

•.!

8
o
~
OJ-=[]

COUNTY ADDED

rz.m COUNTY

SOURCE"

DELETED

Office of Management and Budget

~---..-----------------------------------------------------------7
nUs'
Iness Review / July 1973

Continued population growth
will make further changes in
SMSA's of the District. Some projections of population in Texas, for
example, show an increase of 60
percent in the next two decades.
And patterns of growth over the
past two decades suggest that most
of this increase can be expected
in urban areas.
In the years ahead, decision
makers in business and government will continue following
SMSA statistics very closely. And
patterns of growth in the District
will, in turn, reflect decisions
reached on the basis of SMSA
designations.

New member banks

The Suburban National Bank, Houston, Texas, a newly organized institution
located in the territory served by the Houston Branch of the Federal Reserve
Bank of Dallas, opened for business May 29, 1973, as a member of the Federal
Reserve System. The new member bank has capital of $400,000, surplus of
$400,000, and undivided profits of $200,000. The officers are: Edwin E. Finn,
Chairman of the Board; Jack L. Whitt, President; G. Ralph Johnson, Jr., Vice
President; and Gene Berry, Cashier.
The Eisenhower National Bank, San Antonio, Texas, a newly organized
institution located in the territory served by the San Antonio Branch of the
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, opened for business June 18, 1973, as a
member of the Federal Reserve System. The new member bank has capital of
$200,000, surplus of $125,000, and undivided profits of $75,000. The officers
are: Charles E. Cheever, Jr., President; Robert L. Bennett, Executive Vice
President; James H. Matthews, Lending Officer; and Mrs. Maria Wilson, Cashier.
New par bank

The Industry State Bank, Industry, Texas, an insured nonmember bank located
in the territory served by the Houston Branch of the Federal Reserve Bank of
Dallas, was added to the Par List on June 13, 1973. The officers are: Jay C.
Buenger, President (Inactive); Arno W. Krebs, Executive Vice President; and
Dennis B. Rudloff, Cashier.

-----------------------------------------------

~

8

Federal Reserve Hank of Vallas

July 1973

Statistical Supplement to the Business Review
Total credit at weekly reporting
banks in the Eleventh District
declined in the four weeks ended
June 20. The drop was accompanied by sizable decreases in large
CD's outstanding and holdings of
municipal securities, as well as
a slight decline in time and savings deposits.
Total loans expanded at a rapid
p.ace, however, mainly due to contInued strong demand for credit
?y businesses attempting to rebuild
Inventories. Consumer demand for
credit also remained stronger than
~sual"as automobile purchases contInued at high levels. Real estate
loans, security loans, and loans to
nonbank financial institutions all
decreased-a change not in line with
the moderate increases typically
~hown during comparable periods
In recent years.
. The banks added to their hold~ngs of U.S. Government securities
l~ the fou.r weeks, but this expanSIOn was overshadowed by a substantial reduction in holdings of
tnunicipal securities.
I
Total deposits advanced consid~rably, primarily reflecting a large
Increase in demand deposits. Due
the selling of municipal securiles and this inflow of demand dePosit funds, banks were able to
s1'
b Ightly reduce their Eurodollar
. orrowings. There was no change
In commercial paper borrowings.

!?

:the seasonally adjusted Texas
~~dustrial producti<!)ll index conllnued to rise in May, reaching a
l ~\7el 5.6. percent above a year earfler . Gams were made on a broad
Wnt, with increases reported for
: the major sectors- manufac\Iring, mining, and utilities.
tI In manufacturing, production of
ondurable goods continued to

rise, boosted by strong increases in
petroleum refining and food processing. Durable goods production
eased slightly, despite sizable increases in the output of primary
metals and stone, clay, and glass
products. Having trended sharply
upward since early 1972, durable
goods production in May was still
8.7 percent above a year before.
The month-to-month gain in
mining resulted primarily from
increases in output of crude oil,
natural gas, and metal, stone, and
earth minerals. Although crude
oil production was slightly ahead
of May last year, output of natural gas and natural gas liquids
was below year-earlier levels.
Registrations of new passenger
automobiles in Dallas, Fort Worth,
Houston, and San Antonio advanced 16 percent in May. All
centers reported increases in registrations. These ranged from 11
percent in Houston to 23 percent
in Fort Worth. Total registrations
were 15 percent higher than in
May 1972, and cumulative registrations for the first five months of
1973 were 22 percent greater than
for the same period in 1972.
Seasonally adjusted total employment in the five southwestern
states rebounded in May, regaining most of the loss of the month
before. But the labor force, which
had also declined slightly in April,
grew enough in May to force the
unemployment rate up to 3.9 percent from the 3.8 percent reported
for April.
Manufacturing employment
showed no change overall for May,
as gains in the durable goods
sector were offset by declines in
nondurables. N onmanufacturing

employment rose slightly, however
with increases reported in every ,
industry category but government.
The largest month-to-month
employment increases were in
finance and services. All industry
categories showed year-to-year
employment gains.
Department store sales in the
Eleventh District were 15 percent
higher in the four weeks ended
June 23 than in the comparable
period last year. Cumulative sales
through that date were 13 percent
greater than in the corresponding
period in 1972.
Conditions for both crops and livestock in the five Eleventh District
states improved significantly in
June. Spring planting progressed
well, with planting of cotton in
Texas edging slightly ahead of the
normal schedule. In some eastern
areas of the District, excess rainfall slowed farming operations. As
wheat harvest began in early June,
winter wheat production in the five
states was estimated at 260 million bushels, almost three-fourths
more than the 1972 crop.
Cattle feeding continued to expand, with more than 2.2 million
head of cattle on feed in Texas as
of June 1, up 10 percent from a
year before. Most of the growth
was in the northern Panhandle,
the state's main cattle feeding region. Despite this increase in numbers of cattle on feed, commercial
cattle slaughter in the District
states was only slightly higher
through April of this year than for
the same period last year.
The index of prices received by
Texas farmers and ranchers advanced 3 percent in the month
(Continued on back page)

CONDITION STATISTICS OF WEEKLY REPORTING COMMERCIAL BANKS
Eleventh Federal Reserve District
(Thousand dollars)
May 23,
1973

898,020
9,676,602

902,993
9,60B,806

634,096
7,961,094

Commercial and industrial loons ....... .... .. .
Agricultural loans, excluding CCC
certificates of interest ... . ................ .
loons to brokers and dealers for
purchasing or carrying:
U.S. Government securities •. . ... . .... . .....
Other securities .. ........................ .
Oth er loons for purchasing or carrying:
U.S. Government securities .. . ............. .
Other securities . ... ..... . ..... ...•... •.. .
Loans to nonbank Anancial institutions:
Sales Ana nee, personal Ana nee, factors,
and other business credit companies ... .. . .

All other •.•...•..... . . • ....••.• • .•• • .••
Other bonds, corporate stocks, and securities:
Certificates re pr esenting participations in
federal agency loons ..•. .... . ..........
All other (Including corporate stocks) .. ... ... .
Ca sh items in process of collection .•.. . . .. .......
Re se rves with Federal Reserve Bank .. .. . . .. .... .
Currency and coin . .... ................. . .. . .
Balances with banks in the United States . ....... .
Balances with bonks In foreign countries .. ... . ... .
Other assets (including investments in subsidiaries
not consolidated) . .........••. . ......... ..•

---- - -10,968 - - - -4,385,995
4,3
3,581,944

June 21,

13,424,522

12,252,117

4,657,6 15
739,366
144,667
1,178,805

6,767,722
4,645,708
459,986
249,326
1,289,177

2,779
48,870
92,538
6,556,297

2,613
44,444
96,591
6,560,42 1

2,775
33,591
87,159
5,484,395

1,185,236
3,512,876
1,730,795
30,026
84,844

1,185,088
3,551,008
1,692,612
28,815
90,178

1,175,3 18
2,806,579
1,369,088
24,303
87,207

(

12,400
120

12,600
120

20,800
1,100

r

2,599,961
228,703
544,556
162,237
13,966
1,200,002

2,581,296
20 1,279
556,372
160,578
13,970
1,186,778

1,676,322
39,808
482,158
139,152
17,699
1,1 12,029

TOTAL LIABILITIES, RESERVES, AND
CAPITAL ACCOUNTS •••• .•. • .•...• • .• •. 18,238,948

18,124l95

1 5/19,2~

June 20,
1973

LIABILITIES

---6,933,226
4,838,097
512,987
242,658
1,195,297

Totol demand d eposits ...•... ....... .. .. .. • .

Individuals, partnerships, and corporations ....
States and political sub divisions . . ..........
U.S . Government . ...... . ... .............

272,463

266,843

196,169

Bonks in the United Sta tes •..... . . ... .. •..•
Foreign:

22,211
35,830

319
57,524

1,160
72,602

4,968
491,647

5,155
523,052

5,670
470,086

banks, and international institutions • • .• • .
Commercial banks .... . ... .. . ..........
Certifl ed and ofAcers' checks, etc . .. . ....•..•
Total time and savings deposits .••.. ...... .. . .

---6,864,101

Governments, affleial institutions, central

194,301
657,586
1,337,205
37,044
60,432
1,032,215

193,845
678,780
1,349,137
28,396
60,919
1,017,755

131,198
584,623
1,036,148
20,342
32,835
868,052

500
1,144,205
3,900,189

500
1,1 15,613
3,970,615

0
960,265
3,700,070

918,216
140,162
0

Other .••......•.• • .•.. •. .• •. • • • •.....•

Total U.S. Government securities . . . . ....... .. .
Treasury bills . ....... .... .............. .
Treasury certiflcotes of indebtedness ..... .. .
Treasury notes and U.S. Government
bonds maturing :
Within 1 year .................. . ..... .
1 year to 5 years .•••. .............. . ..
After 5 years .. ............. .. .. .. . . . .
Obligations of states and political subdivisions:
Tax warrants and short·term notes and bills ..•

1972

Total deposits ••• • ..•• . •• • •. • •••••• • .••••.••. 13,4B9,523

Federal funds sold and securities purcha se d
under agreements to resell . . ....... ........ .
Other laan s and discounts, gross .. .. . ... .. . . . .. .

Real estate loans . ... . . . .................. .
loons to dome stic commercial bonks . ... ...... .
loons to foreign banks ... .... ............. .
Consumer instalment loons . .........•.. . .....
loons to foreign governments, official
institutions, central bonks, and international
institutions .. .........................•..
Other loons •• .. . ... ... . .. . . .... .. .. ... . . • .
Total investm ents ....•. .......................

May 23,
1973

June 21,

1973

June 20,

ASSETS

910,944
140,973
0

----

147,499
470,949
159,606

148,690r
457,684r
163,597r

---1,012,396
188,273
0
148,300
505,979
169,844

160,338
2,573,989

213,896
2,601,395
8,581
235,799
1,445,55 1
872,795
116,686
416,235
16,804

23,043
230,939
1,51 7,750
816,653
98,627
396,412
10,270

797,020

774,3 10

Other time d epos its . .......••.. ..•...• •
Stat es and political subdivisions .... ........
U.S. Government (including postal savings) ... .
Banks in the United States ..• . . . ...........
For eign:
Governments, ofAcial institutions, cen tral
bonks, and international institutions ... . . .
Comm ercia l bonks .. .. •. . ..............
Federal fund s purchased and securities sold
under agreements to repurchase .. . ... . .......
Other liabilities for borrowed money . ...........
Oth er liabilities .... . . .. . ... .. .. ...• .... . ....•
Reserves on loans .•.. .......... . .... .......••
Reserves on securities .. ................•.....•
Total capital accounts . . .... ... . ... . ... ... . .. .

----

134,800
2,298,892

8,564
239,082
1,413,184
1,061,942
114,593
362,777
14,621

Ind ividua ls, partnerships, and corporations:
Savings deposits ........ . ..............

1972

584,313

TOTAL ASSETS . . ........................ 18,238,948

DEMAND AND TIME DEPOSITS OF MEMBER BANKS
Eleventh Federal Reserve District

-

(Averages of dally figures . Million dollars)

---- ---18,124/95 15.7 19,285

DEMAND DEPOSITS

TIME DEPOSITS
U.S.

-

Dole

Total

Adjusted'

Government

Total

Savings

1971 : May ••• •. •
1972: May .••.. •

r-Revised

11,348
12,268
12,320
12,529
12,420
12,619
12,866
12,844
13,439
13,636
13,270
13,203
13,237
13,136

7,917
8,530
8,553
8,694
8,824
8,933
9,034
9,321
9,688
9,802
9,516
9,454
9,550
9,502

285
384
280
289
226
254
264
222
289
317
379
395
331
341

9,516
11,075
11,233
11,304
11,441
11,492
11,618
12,009
12,261
12,501
12,811
13,038
13,249
13,336

2,392
2,660
2,688
2,714
2,7 17
2,744
2,770
2,786
2,812
2,815
2,817
2,848
2,855
2,859

Jun e •.. ...

July •..•.••
August. .. . .
September.
October ...
November ..
December ..

CONDITION STATISTICS OF ALL MEMBER BANKS
Eleventh Federal Reserve District

1973: January ••• •
February .••

(Million dollars)

Item

May 30,
1973

April 25,
1973

May 31,
1972

18,404
2,317
6,042
1,438
335
1,377
18
1,952
1,478

18,357
2,444
6,015
1,390
334
1,2 17
14
1,606
1,373

15,063
2,342
5,161
1,605
291
1,369
14
1,876
1,169

TOTAL ASSETSe • • .••.•••..••...••••••

RESERVE POSITIONS OF MEMBER BANKS

33,361

32,750

28,890

LIABILITIES AND CAPITAL ACCOUNTS

Eleventh Federal Reserve District

Demond deposits of banks . ... .... .. . . .•.
Other demand deposits ... ...... . .... . ...
Time d eposits . ...... .•.......... . ......

1,730
11,737
13,326

1,548
11,466
13,302

1,782
10,855
11,1 73

(Averages of dally figures. Thousand dollars)

Total deposits . . •. .... " ..... .. .... . ..
Borrowings . ......... .. ... .. ...........
Other liabililies e .• .. . ... ... . •........ . .•
Total capitol occounts e . ••• .. . ... . .. . ... .

26,793
3,018
1,266
2,284

26,316
3,011
1,174
2,249

23,810
1,742
1,394
1,944

TOTAL LIABILITIES AND CAPITAL
ACCOUNTSe •••..•.. •• .••.••.• .• . •

33,361

32.750

28,890

a-Estimated

--------------------------------------------------------~----1. Other than those of U.S . Government and dom estic commercial banks, lesS
cash Items in process of collection

ASSETS
Loans and discounts, gross . .• . • . •.. ......•
U.S. Government obligations .. . . ....•...••
Oth er securities ...• . ...•......•..••.... .
Reserves with Federa l Reserve Bonk . .... .. .
Cosh in vault .••• .... .... . ... . . ... .....•
Balances with banks in the United States . ..•
Balances with bonks in foreign countries c . .. .
Ca sh items in process of collection .•••.•.. ..
Oth er assets e . .. . ......•..•..••.•.••...

March .••.•
April. .• • ••
May ••••••

-

It em

5 weeks ende d
June 6, 1973

.4 weeks ended
May 2, 1973

5 weeks ended
June 7, ~

Total reserves held .. . ...... . .... .
W ith Federal Reserve Bank ... . . .
Currency and coin .••. . . ...•...
Required reserves . ... ... . ...... .
Excess resorves . . . .............••
Borrowings .•... ....... •. ....•..
Free reserves .• .... .•.. .••.. ...•

1,747,854
1,459,210
288,644
1,751,036
-3,182
96,911
- 100,093

1,767,926
1 478 645
'
,
289,281
1,759,252
8,674
124,547
-1 15,873

1,867,247
1,606,69 2
260,55 5
1,845,526
721
21, 20
21,70 1

------------------------------------------------------

r

i
r

I

I

BANK DEBITS, END-OF-MONTH DEPOSITS, AND DEPOSIT TURN OVER

SMSA's in Eleventh Federal Reserve District
(Doll a r a mounts In thousa nds, season ally adj usted)
DEBITS TO DEMAND DEPOSIT ACCOUNTS '
DEMAND DEPOSITS'
Percent chang e

Standard metropolitan

$ 13,641,440
4,539,954
16,124,274
1,191.006
3,112,147
9,460,747
13,102,212
7,729.230
3,133,945
1.672.240
8.296, 199
629, 128
192.744,089
10.544,298
31,264,760
3.265,801
165,981,685
2.418,448
1,372,607
7.686,424
3,380.520
2,5 18,550
2,457.170
2.041.900
26,936.902
1,426,504
1,946,909
2.947,369
4,498,860
3.305,413

April
1973

May
1972

1973 from
1972

Moy 3 1,
1973

May
1973

April
1973

Moy
1972

12 %
-7
B

39%
17
16
22
22
21
8
16
17
28
17
34
30
13
14
10
26
25
27
36
42
16
36
32
25
23
13
17
12
16

32%
24
16
10
18
25
10
15
19
15
13
30
18
17
14
17
20
25
22
31
27
15
16
20
17
12
13
18
19
13

$332,293
120.029
320,430
4B,302
141 ,896
233,767
50 1,208
291,042
126,797
5B,309
288,633
42, 176
3,114,784
325,425
869.667
134,222
3,448,467
121,180
63,504
226,955
180.049
163,935
100,794
91,8 17
918.767
88,B92
89.207
124,874
162, 181
150,889

40.6
3B.l
49.5
25.0
22.7
41.9
28.0
26.8
25.3
28.6
29.2
15.3
63.0
33.6
35 .6
24.7
48.7
20.4
22 .2
34.7
19.4
15.4
24 .9
22.2
29.3
16.B
21.4
23.2
28.2
22.4

36.0
40.5
46.9
24.0
21.8
41.7
33.3
27.4
27.7
23 .0
31.9
15.7
59.7
34.9
36.1
27.5
47.9
22 .5
22.8
36.0
20.1
15.1
23 .3
21.3
29.0
16.5
21.6
22.9
28.8
23 .4

33.3
35.1
45.B
22.7
21.9
40.B
30.7
24 .1
27.3
25.5
26.7
14.0
53.1
32.1
34.B
24.1
42.0
18.7
21.8
29.4
16.9
14.4
16 .9
19.4
26.5
15.8
19.9
21.8
27.7
21.3

25%

19%

43.2

42.4

38.2

basis)

ARIZONA· Tucson
lOUIS IAN'A, Monr~~:: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

5 months,

(Annual-rat e

statistica l area

Shreveport .. . . ... .... ..... . .. . . . ..... .. .

NEW MEXICO, Roswell' • • ••.•.• . . " . .••. . .• , ..•.•...•
TEXAS, Abilen e •. .•....•.......•. . ...... •• .. .. . . ..• .
Amarillo ... ..... . ..... . . .... . . . .... . . ..... . .

Austin .... .. ... . ....... .. .......•....... . . . .
Beaumont-Port Arthur-Orange ••. •... . .... . . .....
Brownsvill e- Harlingen-San Benito ... . .......... ...

Bryon- College Station ........... . .............

2~;~~~n~h~i~t.i:: ,,',', ',:',',',',: ',',',:',',',',',:::::',: ',:: :
Dallas .•.......•..•..•. . .• •....•.. . . .. ••.. ..
EI Paso .. . ......... .... . ... ............ .. ...
Fort Worth ..... . . ........ . .. .. . . ..... . .......
Galveston-Texas City .......... . ........ . . . ....
Houston •. •• ... . ..............•......... . ... .
Killeen- Te mple • •. ••... . ... .. . •.•. . ...........
Loredo ••••.. . •. . ..•. . . •....•...... . •. •. . .. •

lubbock ...... ........... ...................
McAllen·Phorr- Edinburg •.. . ...... . . ......•.....
Mi dland . • • ...•. . •.. . .... • ..•....... ... .... .
Od ess a •....... • . .. • . . ..... . .. . . ..•. .. .••.. •
San Angelo •.• .•. . .. • . .. . • .. ..•• . ...•....... .
Son Antonio • • • ...•....•.....•.......... . ••.•
Sherman-Denison . •. ........ . . ... . • . .....•. .. .
Texarkana (Tex as -Arkan sas ) ... . . . .• .. ...... • . ..

Tyler .......... . . . ........ ... ...... . ........
Waco . •... .. . . •. . . •.....•.. . .•. . .... . ..• • . .

-

Wichita Foils •.•.•....•...•••.....•.•....•.•.•

iota l_30 centers .••...••......... .... .......•.....•

Annual rate
of turnover

May 1973 from

May
1973

7
4
- 10
- 1
-3
27
-7
-1
10
-4
- 1
-8
4
-6
2
0
1
5
8
9
3
7
- 1
1
2
0
5%

$549,370,731

$ 12,8BO,49 1

1. Deposits o f Individuals. partnerships. a nd corporations a nd of states and political subdivisions
2. County basis

CONDITIO N OF THE FEDERAL RESE RVE BANK OF DALLAS

----

BUILDING PERMITS

(Thousand doll a rs )

1973

Moy 23.
1973

Totol gold cort IA cote reserves•.... . •.•. . .. ..
l Oans to

632,969
56.275
0
52.952
3,213.532
3,322,759
1,7 19, 105
2,332,995

350,529
48.060
0
56.91 1
3.409.457
3,514,42B
1,490.53 1
2,2BO,50 1

379,198
1,280
0
50,B25
3.190,37 1
3,242,476
1,487,054
2, 138,141

VA LUATION (Dollor omounts in thousands)

June 2 1,

item

Oth

Jun e 20,

member bank s•.•.....•...........

Fed:~~f~ns ••••... : .. : ........• . ... .. ••. ~
Os G
gency obliga tions ••.....•..... • ...

i~t' I OVernm ent se curitie s. ••... . .... . ..... ,

Me~b~~r~ing assets •.... , . " .......• . . •...•

--Fed

ank re se rve d eposits •.............
ora l Reserve notes in actual circulation • ••..

1972

Percent change

May 1973
May
1973

5 mos.

-----April May

5 months,

1973 from
1972

5 mos.

434

2,764

$ 14,6 14

$83,277

93
520

404
2,224

5,034
5,OB2

13,127
42,856

132
23

250
-26

- 15
63

94
205
517
254
117
293
Dollas .. . .. .. . 1,454
41
Denison •.•.•..
683
EI Pa so .......
452
Fort Worth ...•
54
G a lveston • . .. .
Houston ••. . . . . 3,727
49
La redo .••.. . .
207
lubbock ••••..
102
Mid land •....•
120
Od essa •..... .
160
Port Arthur ..••
75
San Ange lo • • •.
San Antonio .•. 1,953
51
Sherman •.. . ..
61
Te xa rk ana . • . •
234
Woco •.......
70
Wichita Fo ils •• •

37B
801
2,541
978
511
1,626
7,259
126
2,695
1,898
279
13,468
259
895
452
547
559
412
9,033
187
266
1,022
385

3,750
4, 153
17,983
3,06B
3,022
5,25 1
32,871
2B2
19,566
8,202
1,335
59,456
2,297
6,588
1,727
1,244
I,B47
1,007
19,Q90
726
3 13
1.2 17
3,7 12

14.693
22,875
109,020
12,BB6
14,203
28,417
144,79 1
1,449
74.144
56,764
5,725
332,334
11 ,308
39,173
7.520
6,53B
3.747
4,796
10 1,7 11
3,135
1.923
17,575
10.470

180
-25
-25
50
-22
18
44
271
8
-26
24
7
389
-27
22
-6
679
16
-9
-2 3
-40
-27
455

189
80
0
-2
11 6
5
3
40
27
- 8
-3 9
12
330
20
100
-3B
43
46
40
129
-65
-55
307

84
105
9
5
149
- 9
-22
- 1
-10
81
- 18
25
11 6
75
-26
-60
34
48
5
-2 1
-54
30
74

Total-26 cities • .• 12,020

51,969

Area

ARIZONA
Tucson • ..•.•..

1973

1973

1972

1973
- 9%

29%

-5%

LO UISI ANA
Monroe- West
Monroe • • •••
Shreveport ••..

TEXAS

Abilene • . . • . ••
Amarillo ••••••
Austin • . •....•
Beaumon t .• .. •
Brown svill e •...
Corpus Christi • •

VALU E OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS
(Million d ollars)

"""-

January-M ay

_ _Area and type

l

FIVe
ST OUTH WESTERN
R .~ES"" """""'"
No sl en tia I building ... . ..•
Nonresidential building . •••
ONlonbuilding construction •. • •

R~e.~

from

NUMBER
Moy
1973

STATES ............

Nosl cntio l building .. . .. ..

NO~be~identiol building . •. .
~ding construction • • ..

Moy
1973

Apri l
1973

1,107
578
363
166
9.428
4.754
2,629
2.045

954
477
282
195
8,8 14
4.512
2,634
1.668

March

1973

1973

1,110
532
439
138
8,644
4.643
2,707
1,294

4,937
2,508
1,703
725
40,510
20.455
12.570
7,4B5

1972
4,872
2.293r
1,2B4r
1,295r
36,057r
17.288r
10,754r
8.016r

1. Arl
t..... ReZ? na. LOUisi a na, New Mex ico, Ok lahoma, a nd Texas
No,. v sed
SOU" : Details m a y not add to to ta ls b ecause of rounding.
RCE : F. W. Dodge Divisio n. McGraw- Hili Info rma tion Syste ms Company

------$223,437 $ 1,164,457

6%

17%

10%

DAILY AVERAGE PRODUCTION OF CRUDE OIL

LABOR FORCE, EMPLOYMENT, AND UNEMPLOYMENT

(Thousand barrels)

Five Southwestern States 1
Percent chong e from

Area

FOUR SOUTHWESTERN
STATES .•••.•..••..•..•.
louisiana .... ........ . ...
New Mexico .............
Oklahoma ••••.••••..• ...
Texas ........ . ... ..... .
Gulf Coast . • .• •. ....••
West Texas ......... ..
East Texas (proper) •.••.
Panhandle ...... .......
Rest of state .• •. .•• .••.

UNITED STATES . ..• . ..• • •.•

May
1973
6,784.2
2,329.6
274.4
546.0
3,634 .2
724 .4
1,837.2
252.4
63.6
756.6
9,363.3

Ap ril
1973

May
1972r

6,778.8
2,359.0
275.2
546.0
3,598.6
727.8
1,8 14.9
248.2
60.8
746.9
9,342 .5

7,125.9
2,505.8
310.0
585.1
3,725.0
712 .2
1,865.4
233.2
77.8
836.4
9,756.9

April
1973
0. 1%
-1.2
-.3
.0
1.0
-.5
1.2
1.7
4.6
1.3
.2%

(,

(Seasonally adjusted)

I

May
1972
-4.8%
-7.0
-11.5
-6.7
-2.4
1.7
-1.5
8.2
- 18.3
-9.5
-4.0%

r-Revised
SOURCES: America n Petroleum Ins titute
U.S. Bureau of Mines
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas

Perc ent chang e

May 1973 from

Thousands of persons

Ite m
Civilian labor force .. .. ..•. .
Totol employment •.... . . . . ..
Total unemployment •. ••• •.• ,

Unemployment rate ... •....•
Total nonagricultural wage
and salary employment. ...

Manufacturing . . . . . . . . ...
Durable .... . ... .......
Nondurable . ..........
Nonmanufocturing . •••••.•
Mining •.•............ .
Construction •.••. .•....
Transportation and
public utifities . •..•.••

Trade ... . . .. ........ .
Finance . •.......•..•. •
Service ••... •••.•.. . • •
Government •. •.....•••

-----May
1972

May
1973p

April
1973

May
1972r

8,869.1
8,5 21.8
347.3
3.9%

8,843.8
8,505.8
338.1
3.8%

8,626.4
8,252.7
373.7
4.3%

7,027.3
1,223.8
681.6
542.2
5,803.6
233.3
487.4

7,017.7
1,223.6
680.3
543.3
5,794 .1
232.8
486.4

6,746 .9
1,177.0
641.2
535.8
5,570.0
231.2
448.0

.1
.0
.2
-.2
.2
.2
.2

4.2
4.0
6.3
1.2
4.2
.9
8.8

477.2
1,680.6
381.4
1,150.7
1,392.9

476.9
1,678.8
379.6
1,145.9
1,393.8

464.6
1,612.1
357.0
1,100.6
1,356.6

.1
.1
.5
.4
-.1%

(

2.7
4.2
6.8
4.6
2.7%

Ap r.
1973

0.3% 2.8%
3.3
.2
2.7 -7.1
' -.4
'. 1

(
f

i
t

1. Arizona, LouiSiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas

2. AC1ual change
p-Prellmlnary
r-Revised
No1 e: De 1ails may not add to totals because of rounding.
SOURCES: State employmen1 agencies
Fed e ral Rese rve Bank of Dallas (seasona l adjustment)

I
I

INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION
(Seasonally adjusted Indexes, 1967

Area and type of index

= 100)
May
1973

April
1973

March
1973

May
1972

137.8
142.3
156.1
132.4
120.6
161.8

137.2
142.1
156.8
131.5
118.9
161.5

135.3
139.8
154.5
129.3
117.5
161.2

130.5
131.5
143.6
122.8
120.3
160.1

TOTAL .oIL WELLS DRILLED
Percent change,

TEXAS
Totol industrial production ..... .
Manufacturing ...•••..• • .. ••. .•

Durable . . .................. .
Nondurable . ... .... ...... . . . .

Mining •••..... •• .....•...•... .
Utilities .. ... ..... . ...... .. ... .
UNITED STATES
Totol industrial production . . . .. .
Manufacturing .• • •.••.. •..• •. . .

Durable . ... .............. .. .
Nondurable . .... .. ...... . . . . .
Mining •••...... . .. .. ..... .. .. .

Utilities ••..... .. ............. .

-

first quarter 1973 from

Fourth

------------. --Fourth
First

122.8
122.3
118.4
128.1
106.0
151.4

122.0
121.8
117.5
128.0
106.3
149.6

p-Prellmlnary
r-Revised
SOURCES: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas

ended May 15 to a level nearly a
third higher than a year earlier.
Most of the monthly increase was
in the prices of cotton, oil crops,
fruits, and vegetables. A slight
gain in meat animal prices was
partially offset by declines in the
prices of dairy products, poultry
and eggs, and wool. The index of

113.2
112.3
106.3
120.8
107.9
141.1

quarter

quarter

Area

1973

1972

1972

FOUR SOUTHWESTERN STATES •.•••
123.4
123.2
119.3
128.9
106.1
151.1

First
quarter

1,403
243
95
148
92
196
872
2
870
2,474

1,325
206
78
128
92
207
820

5.9%
18.0
21.8
15.6
.0
- 5.3
6.3

_22.1%
_5.1
48.4
_22.9
_36.1
_ 35.7
_20.5

820
2,637

6.1
-6.2%

_20.6
_ 17.0%

Louisiana •••. ••.....•.....•...•
Offshore ........... . ...... . .
On shore .... .. ......• . . .....
New Mexico ... .. ............ . .

Oklahoma ••••.. . ...•• .. •. . ••••
Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . ......•.... .

Offshore .••.. . .•...•..• . . •• .
On shore .. ... ..... .. .. .. . .. .

UNITED STATES .........•... • .•••

o

quarter

1972

--------------------------------------------------------SOURCE: Am e rican Petroleum Institute

livestock prices was 38 percent
higher than in May of last year,
while crop prices averaged 22 percent higher.
The index of prices paid by U.S.
farmers and ranchers rose slightly
in the month ended at mid-May to
a level 14 percent ahead of a year
earlier. Higher livestock feed prices

accounted for most of this rise.
Rising farm prices continued to
bolster cash receipts from farm
marketings in the five District
states. Crop and livestock receipts
in the first four months of this yeat
totaled nearly $2.5 billion, compared with almost $2.0 billion for
the same period in 1972.

(