The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
business • rev.ew november 1963 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF DAL IL AS This publication has been digitized and made available by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas' Historical Library (FedHistory@dal.frb.org) contents southwestern farm real estate developments . ...................... . 3 district highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 southwestel-'" fal-m l-eal estate developments Farm real estate values in the five southwestern states reached a new high of almost $23 .8 billion early this year, a level about two-thirds above a decade ago. The advance during the past 10 years was a continuation of the generally upward movement characterizing rural land values in not only the Southwest but also the Nation since World War II. The continuation of the fairly persistent and pervasive rise in the value of farm real estate reflects influences originating from both the agricultural industry and the nonfarm sector of the economy. Owners and many nonowners of farm and ranch property are affected by developments in the farm real estate market. Farm and ranch real estate not only provides current and potential income but may represent the accumulated savings and efforts of most of their lifetime. Ownership of land has been a traditional means through which many people have sought to build an estate, achieve security in their old age, and provide for periods of ill health. Changes in the value of the property could significantly affect how well these goals are being met. Those desiring land for nonagricultural uses are affected by developments in the farmland market. Individuals seeking land for commercial, industrial, and resident ial subdivisions usually satisfy their needs by acquiring open land. Because of their responsibilities for planning and providing essential public services and facilities, officials of governmental units are interested in farm real estate values. Lenders in the farm mortgage field - including insurance companies, banks, and individuals - also have an important interest in rural land values since most real estate mortgages typically are made for relatively long periods. To farmers and nonfarmers alike, the ownership of farmland has an attraction other than just the income-producing potential. Rural property is valued highly as a place to rear children, hunt or fish, achieve privacy, or just loaf. Such objectives add another dimension to the interest in farm real estate prices. Land and buildings comprise by far the largest proportion of total farm and ranch capital. In the Southwest the share of total farm and ranch capital accounted for by land and buildings in 1961 varied from 78 percent in the case of typical commercial cattle ranches to as much as 86 percent for irrigated cotton farms in the Texas High Plains. The relative importance of farm real estate capital on these kinds of farms and ranches, as well as many other types of commercial farms, in the Southwest in 1961 was little changed from 1954. rising land values The average value of farm real estate per acre (including both land and buildings) reached a new record in July 1963 in each of the Eleventh District states, according to data compiled by the U. S. Department of Agriculture. As compared with July last year, farmland values ranged from 7 percent higher in Oklahoma to 10 percent greater in Louisiana and Texas. Land values within the Eleventh Federal Reserve District (Texas and portions of Arizona, Louisiana, New Mexico, and Oklahoma) were 10 percent above July 1962. business review/november 1963 3 PERCENTAGE AVERAGE ANNUAL RATE OF INCREASE IN FARM REAL ESTATE VALUES,' 1953-63 Area Rate of increase (Perc ent) Arizona ..... . ....... . .. . ....•.. . .•.. . . Louisi a na .................... N ew Mexico . . ................. Okl ahom a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Texa s .... ........ . . .............. .. . Eleventh Federal Reserve District".. . . . . . United States' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . 5.8 6.7 3.3 5.1 5.4 5.4 4 .6 1 Land and bui ldings as of July l. • Te xas and portions of Ari zona, Louisiana, New Mexico, and Okl ahoma. , 48 states. SOURCES: U. S. Department of Agriculture. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. Nationally, farm real estate values rose 6 percent during the same 12-month period. Although the advance in the market value of farm real estate in the Southwest during the 12 months ended in July was especially sharp, land prices throughout the past decade rose at a more rapid rate in the Southwest than in the Nation, Between July 1953 and July 1963, farm real estate values in the Eleventh District increased at an average annual rate of 5.4 percent, compared with 4.6 percent in the United States (exclusive of Alaska and Hawaii). Among the individual states in the Southwest, the annual increase in land values during this 10-year period varied from 3.3 percent in New Mexico to as much as 6.7 percent in Louisiana. Available data suggest that all types of southwestern farmland - irrigated land, dry-farming land, and grazing land - shared in the upward movement in real estate values during the period. tions in rates of change in such land values probably reflect differences in the strength of the broad influences which have been common in all the areas, as well as factors which may be unique to land values in a particular region. The relatively more rapid rate of growth in southwestern farm real estate values may be accounted for, in part, by the lower per acre value of farmland in the region in comparison with the Nation. Con'sequentIy, a dollar increase in land prices in the Southwest would produce a larger percentage rise in land values than would be ,the case for the Nation. The average value of land and buildings in March this year varied from $28 an acre in New Mexico to $189 an acre in Louisiana. Among the five southwestern states, only the average per acre value in Louisiana exceeded the 48state average of $130 per acre in the Nation. Louisiana also was the only southwestern state in which per acre values exceeded the national average a decade earlier. In addition to the relatively lower value of farm real estate in the Southwest than in the Nation, the demands for land generated by industrialization and other nonagricultural uses in the region have been important factors contributing to the subAVERAGE VALUE OF LAND AND BUILDINGS CAl or Motchl) 1 ARIZONA 4 •••• b 1 LOU ISIANA Although the rates of increase for the areas varied, the trends in farm real estate values in the Nation, the Eleventh District, and the individual southwestern states all followed the same general pattern during the past decade. This similarity in the movement of farmland prices suggests that the broad influences affecting the rural real estate market have been somewhat the same among geographical areas. The varia- I •••••••••• I UNITED STATES* ,. ~.iI~••• • • • • I ••• 1 '~'~''"~ OKLAHOMA TEXAS 1 ------'--.1 1 L 1 J I o 40 BO 120 DOLLARS PER ACRE M48"OI •• . SOURCf: US,Olporlmlnt of Agrlcullur •. c:::J 19~4 _ 1963 I 160 200 stantial rise in farmland prices during the past decade. agricultural influences The trends in farm real estate values and in farm and ranch income usually have been somewhat similar. Following the declines in farm commodity prices and net farm income from the highs reached in 1951 as a result of the Korean conflict, farmland prices in the Southwest lost much of their buoyancy and were little changed between 1952 and early 1954. In the latter part of 1954, however, land prices began to renew their upward climb, while the decline in net farm income continued and was not reversed until 1957. Land values for several years during the midfifties were suppressed somewhat by the widespread drought in the Southwest, which ended with the return of more normal rainfall conditions in 1957; even during the period When the drought was most severe, however, land values in the region were increasing, although at a slower pace than in parts of the United States which had adequate moisture supplies. Between July 1953 and July 1958, a span encompassing the drought period, the index of real estate values in the Eleventh District advanced 13 points, compared with 18 points in the 48 states. During the 1958-63 period, the District index rose 47 points and the national index advanced 26 points. Much of the strength in southwestern land prices in recent years probably is the result of the general improvement in total farm income since the lows of the midfifties. Although about one-fifth below the record total in 1951, the $1.6 billion net farm income of southwestern farmers and ranchers in 1962 is around 50 percent above that in 1956. Because of the fewer number of farms, net income per farm rose an even greater amount - almost 90 percentbetween 1956 and 1962. In the Nation the recovery in farm income was less in terms of both total net income and net income per farm. The efforts of southwestern farmers and ranchers to improve their net income undoubtedly have contributed to the almost consecutive annual gains in farm real estate values. The development and application of new technology and the widespread adoption of existing techniques are means through which farm operators have boosted efficiency and lowered unit production costs. FARM REAL ESTATE VALUES AND NET FARM INCOME ELEVENTH FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT · nEAL ESTATE: VALUES* INDfX,IO&7·&D.IOO NET FARM INCOME." BILLIONS OF DOLLARS 140 1. 8 120 1. 6 100 1. 4 80 1. 2 60 1.0 o ~~~~~~~~~~~~=-~~~ o M Lend and build ing. o. of Jut,!. # Fi wi . 0ulll... ",lIllolu. SOURCE: U D.porfm,nl of Ag,h:ulhlr •• .S. Many of the improvements made by farmers and ranchers during the past few years have contributed to the overall productivity of their property. A substantial number of these improvements have become essentially a part of the farm or ranch itself and, as a result, have boosted the value of the land. An example of some importance in the Southwest is the continuing emphasis placed on irrigation development; between 1954 and 1959, irrigated land in farms in the southwestern states increased around one-fifth to a total of about 8 million acres. The most marked expansion in acreage irrigated in the Southwest during the period occurred in areas where it was feasible to drill wells for subsurface water supplies, and some- business review/ november 1963 5 what less acreage was brought under irrigation in sections which received their water supplies from reservoirs and other surface sources. Extensive irrigation development during the past decade took place in Oklahoma, in the High Plains and more humid areas of Texas, and in various sections of New Mexico and Louisiana. In addition to the investment involved in drilling new wells, considerable costs have been incurred in leveling or shaping the land, constructing surface irrigation ditches and laterals, and otherwise preparing the land for irrigation. One especially costly practice has been the establishment of underground irrigation water distribution systems. Improvements other than irrigation development tend to increase the value of rural land. The construction of stock water structures and water-spreading devices, the eradication of brush and mesquite, and the employment of various other measures have improved the production and utilization of forage and, hence, the carrying capacity of ranges. In eastern sections of the District, many fields which had been abandoned or were low in productivity have been converted to improved pasture or timber. Besides the efforts made to improve efficiency and output on existing acreage, many farmers have viewed the acquisition of additional land as an especially effective means of improving their income. Although data are not available on the proportion of farm and ranch purchases made in order to enlarge existing units in the Southwest, national data indicate a rising proportion of farm real estate transfers for this purpose. In 1962, 46 percent of the farm purchases in the Nation were for farm and ranch enlargement, compared with 29 percent in 1954. A larger acreage can provide an opportunity to utilize existing machinery and equipment and other facilities more efficiently and may make the purchase of larger costsaving machines feasible. 6 Since the acreages of many of the more profitable crops in the Southwest have been under governmental quota and acreage allotment programs, there is a strong incentive to obtain control over additional land with acreage allotments. The existence of a good "cotton base" or "crop history" on a farm is a particularly desirable asset, one which is usually capitalized into the value of the property and thereby boosts its selling price. Farmers and ranchers have been the most important group of buyers and sellers of farm real estate. Among the farmers and ranchers selling land, property sales by those still active in farming have substantially exceeded sales by retired farmers. Purchases of farm real estate by owner-operators have far exceeded those by tenants. As a group, tenants probably are in a somewhat less favorable financial position than farmers who already own some land. Often, the purchase of additional land is facilitated by using the equity in other property as collateral for the transaction. The process of land acquisition for farm enlargement contains some elements which could produce very active bidding among farmers for FARM TITLE TRANSFERS FORCED SALES ALL OTHER SALES VOLUNTARY SALES AND TRADES MYt or endldMarchl. SOURCE: U.S. Olporlmenl of Agrlcullurl. the limited number of farms available for purchase in anyone year or during a short span of years. If a farm or ranch operator wishes to expand the volume of his operations through the purchase of land, one of the more attractive possibilities ordinarily lies in acquiring adjoining or nearby properties. Although most farm equipment is highly mobile, diseconomies, including losses in the timeliness of operations, are likely if the farming tracts are too widely dispersed. The problem of obtaining the piece of property "just next dqor" or "down the road" may be compounded by the possibility that several farmers may be interested in the same tract; sales of farms generally are fairly infrequent, and the sale of a particular farm may be quite rare. In Texas, for example, the U. S. Department of Agriculture estimates that 53.1 farm title transfers per 1,000 of all farms in the State were made during the year ended March 15, 1963. This rate of transfer is above the 44.9 per 1,000 farms a decade earlier but, because of the decline in the number of farms, the number of farm titles changing hands in the most recent 12-month period was considerably fewer. This decrease in the number of farms placed upon the market has been a major factor in characterizing farm real estate as being "tightly held." The tightness with which farm real estate is held is partially reflected in the trend in the types of title transfers of farm and ranch property. In Texas the rate of voluntary sales and trades during the 12 months prior to March 15, 1963, was 30.6 per 1,000 farms in the State, a rate slightly below a decade earlier. Forced sales of farm property as a result of foreclosure Or efforts to avoid foreclosure and sales because of tax delinquency have been relatively few in number. On the other hand, a rising proportion of sales in the State have occurred through transfers arising out of bequests, gifts, and administrators' and executors' sales of estates. Such transfers occurred at the rate of 20.1 per 1,000 farms during the year ended in midMarch of 1963, compared with a rate of 10.5 during the comparable period 10 years earlier. The relatively few voluntary transfers of farmland probably reflect a variety of reasons. Many owner-operators who feel that their existing units are below the optimum size are retaining their present holdings in the hope of purchasing suitable additional land. There are perhaps many other owner-operators who need to enlarge the size of their farms and ranches but have been unable to do so, and they are unwilling to sell their property because of lack of suitable alternatives for making a living. Undoubtedly, the inability of many farmers to buy or sell land at prices and on terms which appear to be reasonable has accounted for the moderation in the number of voluntary transfers. The governmental Conservation Reserve land retirement program also has affected the sale of farmland. The 1956-61 cumulative acreage of land under the program totaled about 6.2 million acres, an amount approximating one-tenth of the total cropland in the five southwestern states in 1959. The annual rental payments for diverting cropland, together with the eligibility of many farmers for social security retirement benefits, have encouraged many individuals to place their farms under long-term contracts and retire from active farming. Some landowners have availed themselves of the opportunity of receiving both annual rental payments and payments for converting cropland to pasture or timber land. Many owners of farm real estate are free of mortgage indebtedness or have a substantial equity in their property; consequently, the burden of interest and principal repayments is nonexistent or minimal. This strong equity position permits the landowner to wait for more attractive bids. In many instances, owners may view current returns to farm real estate business review/november 1963 7 adequate in relation to the price paid for the land several years ago - a view which might change if current returns were related to the land's current value. An additional reluctance to sell farm property purchased several years ago may stem from the capital gains tax the seller would have to pay on the appreciated value of the farm or ranch. Although farm people are considerably more sophisticated than formerly with respect to alternative investment opportunities, the reinvestment of proceeds from the sale of land may introduce another element of uncertainty among some prospective sellers. While the appreciation in the value of farmland can be of significant benefit to owners of rural property, current real estate values present an obstacle to many beginning farmers and tenant farmers desiring to purchase a farm or ranch. Individuals with modest financial resources ordinarily need to borrow substantial amounts in order to purchase an economic-size farm or ranch unit; in addition, allowance must be made for the capital needed to equip and operate the business. Unless assistance is provided by relatives or other interested persons, many would-be purchasers of land are unable to buy land at current prices. nonagricultural factors While the changes occurring within the agricultural industry and the responses of farmers and ranchers to these changes are probably the most important factors influencing southwestern land values, forces of nonagricultural origin also have had an important bearing on rural land values. The opportunity for off-farm employment of owner-operators and family members has permitted many southwestern farmers to maintain their farming interests even though their units are too small to provide full-time employment for themselves and available family labor. The dual sources of income from nonfarm occupations and from farming, including the 8 TYPES OF FARM REAL ESTATE BUYERS AND SELLERS OKLAHOMA AND TEXAS IA... ,rog",lil59-62. V,or Illded March I) ABSENTEE OWNER AND OTHER SOURCE: U Olportm,nl ot Agrlcultur • . .S. use of farm dwellings and home-produced food, have resulted in higher incomes for many rural families than would be possible if full efforts were devoted to a single job. In 1962, over one-third of the total income of farm people in the Nation came from nonfarm sources, and this proportion was somewhat greater for low-volume farm operators. This development has resulted in a closer relationship between farmland prices and the nonagricultural sectors of the economy. Nonfarmer demand for land has been significant in increasing farmland values. During 1959-62 in Oklahoma and Texas, 37 percent of farm real estate purchasers were nonfarmers, and it appears that nonfarmer interest in farmland in this area was somewhat greater than in the Nation. Many nonfarmers may have been attracted to land as an investment because of the appreciation in land values and the feeling that such a purchase was a suitable hedge against inflation. The prestige which some persons attach to the ownership of farm and r,anch property may have encouraged a few nonfarmers to enter the rural real estate market, while some individuals in certain income levels viewed ownership of farm property as a means of achieving tax savings. The desire of nonfarmers to acquire land for recreational purposes has also been important, and the Conservation Reserve program encouraged some non farmers to buy land, especially those who did not need an immediate income return and hoped to take advantage of possible land appreciation or tax savings. The production of minerals and the search for new sources of supply have had an especially important impact upon the southwestern land market. Land values even some distance from regions having proved reserves are often affected by the possibility that mineral deposits may be present, and sometimes this possibility may result in speculative activity. Since mineral rights can be conveyed separately from the other rights to the land, the sale price of a particular farm or ranch may be materially influenced by whether or not mineral rights are included in the transaction. Income from royalties and leases has made a significant contribution to the total family income of landowners, a contribution which was quite important to owner-operators during the drought of the midfifties. In areas where the discovery of new reserves appears especially promising, bonuses for signing leases have, in effect, provided landowners a noteWorthy proportion of the value of the property prior to the influence of mineral activity. The attraction of current and potential mineral income has perhaps increased the reluctance of present landowners to sell their property and has encouraged many farmers and nonfarmers to seek land partly for speculative purposes. Upward pressures also have been placed Upon southwestern real estate values as a result of industrialization, urbanization, and the use of land for airports, superhighways, reservoirs, and similar nonagricultural purposes. Rural land located near rapidly growing towns and cities often is valued in relation to its potential for subdivision into residential, commercial, and industrial sites, rather than for agricultural uses. In addition to the effect of population growth and concentration upon land prices in the immediate fringe areas of towns and cities, there has been a fingerlike extension of residences and' commercial establishments for quite some distance along highways and roads radiating from various major employment centers. Such convenient transportation arteries have encouraged many non farmers to purchase small rural tracts for residences. concluding remarks Among the various influences affecting the upward trend in southwestern land values during the past decade, it appears that bidding by farmers and ranchers for land held by somewhat reluctant sellers was one of the more important. Demand for land to enlarge the size of existing units is likely to continue in the future as farmers and ranchers adjust their operations to meet changing cost-price relationships. The trend in the value of land for agricultural production probably will depend, to a considerable extent, upon expectations with regard to farm and ranch income. Such income, in turn, is dependent upon many factors in both the nonfarm and the agricultural sectors of the economy, including governmental agricultural policies. The tempo of mineral activity, the expansion of nonagricultural job opportunities, changes in working, living, and social habits, and the overall growth of the southwestern economy will have a significant bearing on the demand for rural property. The rather substantial uptrend that has characterized rural land values for many years may have introduced the attitude that further advances are assured. Such an attitude is fraught, of course, with the risks associated with any acquisitions made principally for speculative purposes. business review/november 1963 9 district highlights Industrial production in Texas, seasonally adjusted, rose in September to a record 123 percent of the 1957-59 average, which is up from 120 percent in August and is 5 percent over a year ago. All of the month-to-month advance occurred in manufacturing, as the mining index declined fractionally because of reduced crude petroleum output. Durable goods production increased more than 5 percent over August, paced by gains in the output of primary metals, furniture and fixtures, lumber and wood products, and machinery. The manufacture of nondurable goods, which was essentially unchanged in August from the July level, rose 2 percent in September and was 4 percent above a year earlier. The most notable monthto-month increases occurred in the output of textiles, apparel, and leather and leather products. With all of the Eleventh District states sharing in the improvement, total nonagricultural employment rose during September to 4,785,900 wage and salary workers, advancing nearly 1 percent over the August level and 2 percent over a year ago. Small decreases in the number of workers on manufacturing payrolls in Arizona and New Mexico were more than offset by slight gains in Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas, with the result that total manufacturing employment rose fractionally during September. Nonmanufacturing employment advanced almost entirely on the strength of government hiring, as most other categories either were unchanged or showed slight declines. Calls for crude oil for November have been reduced slightly in the District from the amounts that prevailed in September and October, partly ~ecause of a rapid buildup of heating oil inventories. Unusually mild weather in early autumn, coupled with a continued 10 high rate of crude runs to stills, helped to produce a record level of distillate stocks last month. In New Mexico the October flow rates of 39 barrels daily for the southeastern area of the State (the Eleventh District section) and 70 barrels daily in the northwest have been retained for November. However, because of a reduced rate of new well completions in recent months and one less production day in November, actual crude production in New Mexico may decline about 3 percent. The Texas allowable for November has been set at 27.5 percent of maximum permissible production, down from 28.0 percent in the previous 2 months and the lowest rate since January. Actual crude oil output in the State is expected to decline approximately 1 percent from October. Louisiana has continued the depth bracket allowable for November that was in effect during September and Octobernamely, 31 percent of the March 1953 level. At the District's weekly reporting member banks, commercial and industrial loans registered an increase of 2 percent during the first 9 months of 1963. However, the increase recorded in the commercial and industrial loan category this year is almost double that shown for the comparable period last year. Reflecting a high level of building activity in the District, construction loans advanced almost 17 percent between December 26, 1962, and October 2, 1963, rising $43 million to a level of $304 million. Loans to firms engaged in services increased almost 3 percent, compared with a 9-percent gain a year ago. These two categories comprise about one-half of commercial and industrial loans. ' Borrowings by durable goods manufacturers, which account for about 5 percent of total commercial and industrial loans, rose approximately 3 percent during the first · 9 months of this year. This rise primarily reflects increases in loans to primary metal fabricators and machinery manufacturers. Producers of transportation equipment and "other fabricated metal products" reduced their bank indebtedness. Loans to nondurable goods manufacturers registered little change as substantial repayments by food, liquor, and tobacco manufacturers and petroleum companies almost offset credit extended to textile, apparel, and leather producers. Loans to chemical and rubber producers were about unchanged. Bank indebtedness of mining concerns, which represents approximately 18 percent of the total commercial and industrial category ip the District, declined $5.6 million during the first 9 months of 1963, in contrast to a $17.6 million advance in the comparable period last year. Loans to trade concerns receded $10.3 million, or over 3 percent, during the period as borrowings by both wholesale and retail businesses registered substantial declines. During the corresponding period in 1962, trade concerns reduced their bank indebtedness by 19 percent. The seasonally adjusted index of District department store sales in September was 111 percent of the 1957-59 base, declining slightly from the 112 percent recorded for August and 113 percent a year ago. Cumulative sales for the first 9 months of 1963 were 4 percent above the corresponding period of 1962. Sales in the 4 weeks ended October 26 were 3 percent above the year-earlier figure. Reflecting the continuation of the usual decline in sales toward the end of a model year, registrations of new passenger automobiles in four major Texas markets in September decreased 25 percent from August but were 15 percent higher than in September 1962. Registrations in both Dallas and San Antonio were 30 percent below August, while those in Fort Worth and Houston were 21 percent and 19 percent lower, respectively. However, combined registrations in the four markets during the first 9 months of this year were 12 percent higher than in the comparable period of 1962. During October, drought conditions continued to intensify over much of the District and, in some sections, were the worst since 1956. In the latter part of the month, precipitation was received in some areas, but soaking rains are needed to dispel the effects of the prolonged moisture shortage. Range and pasture forage has progressively become more limited, and widespread supplemental feeding of livestock has been under way. The extremely poor condition of pastures, the short supply of roughage, and the high cost of purchased feedstuffs have confronted some livestock producers with the difficult decision of whether or not to sell their animals. Despite the drought, crop prospects this year are fairly good. The unseasonably warm, open fall weather has been ideal for cotton harvesting and sorghum combining in western and northwestern parts of the District. In areas where 1963 crops have been either completely or nearly harvested, rain is urgently needed for the germination of fall-planted crops. As of October 1, cotton production in the District states is estimated at 6.5 million bales, or 3 percent above the previous month's forecast but 4 percent less than the 1962 output. Outturns are indicated to be below 1962 in all of the District states except Louisiana, which shows a 15-percent gain. The Texas cotton crop estimate, at 4.5 million bales, is 150,000 bales above the September 1 indication but is 5 percent less than last year. Prospective cotton production in the Nation is placed at 14.8 million bales. A crop of this size would be 4 percent above the month-earlier forecast and practically the same as the 1962 production. business review/november 1963 11 The Commercial National Bank of Dallas, Dallas, Texas, a newly organized institution located in the territory served by the Head Office of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, opened for business October 4, 1963, as a member of the Federal Reserve System. The new member bank has capital of $200,000, surplus of $200,000, and undivided profits of $100,000. The officers are: Leonard B. Brown, Chairman of the Board and President; Ken Tuck, Executive Vice President; Thomas H. Means, Cashier; and Raymond Fields, Jr., Assistant Cashier. new ,neuJ,be,· ban'~s The Texoma National Bank of Sherman, Sherman, Texas, a newly organized institution located in the territory served by the Head Office of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, opened for business October 7, 1963, as a member of the Federal Reserve System. The new member bank has capital of $150,000, surplus of $100,000, and undivided profits of $50,000. The officers are: Paul N. Brown, Chairman of the Board; Clyde E. Hale, President; Charles W. Burch, Vice President and Cashier; James F. Chartrau, Assistant Vice President; and Mrs. John C. Towles, Assistant Cashier. The Nassau Bay National Bank of Clear Lake, Clear Lake, Texas (Post Office 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 October 18, 1963, as a member of the Federal Reserve System. The new member bank has capital of $200,000, surplus of $200,000, and undivided profits of $100,000. The officers are: Jake Kamin, Chairman of the Board; Ivan E. Brown, President; Curtis McKallip, Vice President; and Donald R. Cade, Cashier. The Citizens National Bank of Lufkin, Lufkin, Texas, a newly organized institution located in the territory served by the Houston Branch of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, opened for business October 18, 1963, as a member of the Federal Reserve System. The new member bank has capital of $160,000, surplus of $100,000, and undivided profits of $60,000. The officers are: B. H . McVicker, President; Carter Waldrop, Executive Vice President and Cashier; Parker McVicker, Vice President.; H . E. Lacey, Vice President; Murphy George, Vice President; and William D. O'Quinn, Vice President. new pur banks 12 The Post Oak Bank, Houston, Texas, a 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 its opening date, October 30, 1963. The officers are: George A. Butler, Chairman of the Board (Inactive); Robert L. West, President (Inactive); J. R. Lyne, Jr., Senior Vice President and Cashier; and William T. Keenan, Vice President. The Citizens State Bank, Paris, Texas, an insured nonmember bank located in the territory served by the Head Office of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, was added to the Par List on its opening date, October 31,1963. The officers are: Jess B. Alford, Chairman of the Board; Harold T. Hyde, President; and William C. Young, Executive Vice President and Cashier. SliATISTICAL SUPPLEMENiIi to the BUSINESS REVIEW November 1963 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF DALLAS .. CONDITI O N STATISTICS OF WEEKLY REPORTING MEMBER BANKS IN LEADING CITIES RESERVE POSITIONS O F MEMBER BANKS Ele venth Fe dera l Re serve District Eleventh Federal Reserve District (Ave rag es of doil y fl gures. In thousa nds of do lla rs ) (In thousands of dolla rs ) 4 weeks end e d Oct. 23, 1963 Sept. 18, 1963 Oct. 24, 1962 Agricult ura l loans • ••••• • • • • • • • • • •• ••• • ••• •• 1,873,049 45,766 1,890,846 44,248 1,784,825 46,877 l oa ns to brokers and d e al ers for purcha sing or ca rrying : U. S. Gove rnm ent securities • • • . • •.• •••••• . • Other secu ri ti es • •• • •• •• • . .• .• . • • • . .• •• • • 274 55,450 274 56,951 17,004 44,826 1,594 246,415 94,277 2,482 1,690 245,097 80,388 2, 175 2,061 178,264 82,994 6 All other loons ••••••••••••••• • •• • • •• • ••• •• 96,704 257,5 15 346,665 943,047 102,31 5 259,76 1 328,893 921,645 95,603 195,8 16 279, 180 821 ,565 G ross loans ••• • . •• ••.••• • • . • • . • •••. • • •• Less rese rves and unallocated charge ·offs •• 3,963,238 68,734 3,934,283 69,575 3,549,021 61,68 1 Ne t loans • •• • ••••. •• • • • •• •• • • • • ••• • ••• • 3,894,504 3,864,708 3,487,340 Tre a sury bills • • • •• . •• • • • ••• . ••• • •• •• • • •••• Tre a sury ce rtiflcates of ind e bte dn ess •.•••• • •• • Tre a sury notes and U. S. G ove rnm ent bond s, includ ing guaranteed obligations, maturing I Within 1 y e ar • •• •• • •• •• . •• .. • ••.. • • •••• After 1 but within 5 yea rs • •• • .•• • •• • • • • • . • 102,926 68,758 141,252 67,198 187,101 92,136 Other securities • • •• • • • •• • •• • • • • • • ••••• • • .• 134,598 726,887 436,71 1 648,397 147,90 1 7 18,1 47 435,875 627,698 229, 136 578,922 510,9 17 51 5,557 Total investm ents • •• • ••••• • •.• • •••••••••• 2,1 18,277 2,138,071 2, 113,769 Cosh ite ms in process of collection •••.•• • . • • • • Balances with ban ks in th e Unite d States ••• . ••• Bala nc es wit h bon ks in fo re ign countries ••• • • .• Curre ncy and coin . •• • • •• .• • • .. • • • • • ••• • •.. Rese rves with Fed e ral Rese rve Bank • • •• ••••••• Other a sse ts • • •••• . • • ••• ••• •• . ••••••• • •••• 629,853 450,7 16 2,953 64,769 543,666 260,329 668,639 547,5 18 2,646 62,230 574, 189 257,579 55 1,1 15 456,24 1 2,076 61, 176 610,2 45 202,966 Item ASSETS Com me rcial a nd industrial loans • . •••• • • •••••• Other loans for purcha sing or carrying: U. S. Governme nt securities • ••• •• ••• •••••• • Other securities • •• •• . ••••• . . • • • •• • • • • • • • loans to dom es tic comm ercia l banks ••• •••••••• loans to foreig n banks ••• • ••. •. • • • • ••••••• • loans to othe r fl nan cial institution s: Sales flnance, p ersonal Anance , e tc.• • • . • •• •. Savinos bonks, mtge. cos., ins. cos ., e tc . • • •• • • Real estate loan s• ••• •• ••• • • • • • • • • •• • •• •• • • After 5 yea rs .. .................... . ... . TOTAL ASSETS, • , •• •• • • ••• • • • •• • • •• • • 7,965,067 8,115,580 4 wee ks e nd e d Se pt . 4, 1963 Oct. 3, 1962 599,480 557,582 41,898 596,01 5 3,465 9,991 -6,526 586,903 545,732 4 1,17 1 582,445 4,458 2,554 1,904 605,08 1 561 ,2 81 43,800 599,856 5,225 1,2 15 4,010 535,324 412,661 122,663 492,118 43,206 3,5 20 39,686 529,070 4 10,298 118,772 484,893 44,1 77 5,679 38,498 537,576 426,4 14 111,162 478,385 59, 191 6,624 52,567 1,1 34,804 970,243 16 4,56 1 1,088,133 46,67 1 13,5 11 33,160 1,115,973 956,030 159,943 1,067,338 48,635 8,233 40,402 1,142,657 987,695 154,962 1,078,24 1 64,416 7,839 56,577 RESERVE CITY 8ANKS Tota l rese rves he ld . • • ..•• . . ••• With Fe de ral Reserve Bank .... Curre ncy and coin • • . • •• • .. •• Re quire d reserves •••• •. .• • ..•• Excess rese rves • •. ••••. . •••.• • Borrowings • .• •. .. • • . • •• .. • •. . Free rese rves •••• . •• . .•• . . . • •• CO UNTRY 8AN KS Tota l rese rves he ld .• • .. •.•. .• . W ith Fe deral Rese rve Bank .. . . Currency and coin .•••••••• . • Re quire d reserves •• . • • ...• .• .• Excess rese rves •• . •.••• . • ••. . • Borrowings • .• . . • • . ..••. .••••• Free rese rves • • •. . • • . . . •. .. ••• ALL MEMBER 8ANKS Total rese rves he ld . •• • • . .• •••• With Fe d e ral Rese rve Bank.. . . Currency and coin • •. . . • ••• •• Re quire d reserves •• . ..•• . .. . • • Excess rese rve s • .. . •• ... .• ..•• Borrowin gs • . . ••..•• . . . •• . ..•• Free reserves • • • .. .•. . ••••••.• GRO SS DEM A N D AN D TI M E DEPOSI TS O F M EMBE R BANKS Ele ve nt h Fede ra l Reserve Di strict (Ave rag es of daJly flg ures . In mil lions of dolla rs ) GROSS DEMAND DEPOSITS 7,484,928 Date Tota l Rese rve city ban ks 1961 : Septemb er. 1962 : Septemb er. 1963: April ...... Mo y .. .. .. 7,889 8,194 8,284 8,126 8,235 8,3 11 8,164 8,407 3,9 10 4,096 4,016 3,979 4,067 4,088 3,971 4,150 L1A8ILITI E AND CAPITAL ACCO UNTS S De mand de posits Ind ividuals, partnerships, a nd corporations ••• • Fore ign governm e nts a nd offlcial institutions, ce ntra l banks, and inte rna tiona l Institutions .. U. S. Gove rnm ent • • • • • •• • . •. • •• • • • •• •• •• States and politica l subdivisions • •• • ••• • • • •• Banks in th e Unite d States, including mutual savin gs bonks • • • •• . . • • • •••• • • • •• Banks in fo rei gn countries • • • •.• • • . •• • • • • •• Ce rtifl e d and offlcers' checks, etc .. ... . .. .. . 4 wee ks e nd e d Oct. 2, 1963 It em 3,195,886 3, 185,725 3,099,407 2,686 65,572 173,577 2,725 144,144 170,36 1 5,095 203,651 239,470 1,072,366 13,226 43,564 1,213,377 13,411 69,709 1,049,9 13 13,641 46,20 1 4,566,877 4,799,452 1,083,327 948,164 971,360 736,295 505 5,452 307,181 505 5,852 309,690 2,508 6,65 2 254,802 mutual saving s banks • •• •••.•• ••••.• •• •• Bonks in fo reign countries • • • •• ••• ••• • •• • . • 12,061 2,400 14,001 2,400 5,083 2,350 Total time and savings deposit• •• •• '" • •• 2,344,438 2,363,939 1,979,050 Total deposits . . .. . . ......... . ... . . . Capita l accounts • • • ••• • • . • • • • • •• .•• • • • ••• • 6,9 11,3 15 242,695 127,027 684,030 7, 163,39 1 146,720 127,446 678,023 6,636,428 97,400 104,467 646,633 TOTAL LIABILITIES AN D CAPITAL ACCOU NTS. 7,965,067 8,1 15,580 7,484,928 Rese rve Countr y Total city banks bonks 3,979 4,098 4,268 4, 147 4, 168 4,223 4,193 4,257 2,787 3,357 3,836 3,907 3,948 3,975 4,005 4,044 1,404 1,666 1,886 1,935 1,957 1,963 1,983 2,01 4 1,383 1,69 1 1,950 1,972 1,991 2,012 2,022 2,030 4,657,378 1,092,340 924,499 TI ME DEPOSITS Countr y b a nks Tota l demand deposits • • • ..• • •• •••••• • • Tim e and saving s d e posits Ind ividua ls, partne rships, and corporations Saving s d e posi ts ••• • ••• • ••••••• •• • • •. . O the r tim e d e posits •• • • .. • .• • • • • • • • • .• • Foreign gove rnm ents an d offlcial institutions, ce ntral banks, and international institutions .. U. S. Gove rnme nt, incl uding posto l saving s •• • States and political subdivisions •.• • • • •• . •• • J un e • ••• .. July .. .. . . . August. • • • Se pte mb er. CONDITIO N STATISTICS O F ALL M EM BER BAN KS Eleve n th Fe d eral Reserve Di s trict (In millions of dollars) -:;:::. Banks in the United Sta tes, including Bills payable, re d iscounts, e tc ••••• • •• • . • • •• •• All other lia bilities •• • •. • ••••• , ••• • ••• • • . •• • COND ITI O N O F TH E FE DERAL RESERVE BANK OF DALLAS It e m Sept. 25, 1963 Aug . 28, 1963 Sept. 26, 1962 ASSETS Loans an d discounts ••. •• • • . • • •• . • • •.• •• • U. S. Gove rnme nt obligations • • .••••. • " . • . Othe r securities •• •••• . • • • • • • •• . ••••• ••• Reserves with Fed e ral Re se rve Bank • • •• . •• • Cash in va ult e • • • • • ••••• •. .• •..• •• • . • • • Balance s with banks in th e Unite d Sta tes • • . . Balances with ba nks in fo re ign countries e .... Cash ite ms in process of colle ction • ••.•••• . O the r a sse ts e • •• •• • • • .•• •••• • • •. •• .• •• . 6,501 2,806 1,355 887 184 1,176 4 7 12 381 6,370 2,789 1,330 915 181 1,098 3 638 362 5,823 2,860 1,088 906 173 1,146 4 656 318 14,006 13,686 ~ 1,359 7,108 4,047 1,28 1 6,901 4,02 2 1,3 47 6,93 1 3,378 • •• ••• • •• • • • • • • • • • 12,514 146 176 1,170 12,204 163 147 1,172 11 ,656 73 144 1,101 TOTAL L1 A81L1TIES AND CAPITAL ACCOU NTSe • • .. . • •• . • • .. . • ••• . .• • 14,006 13,686 !1J>74 TOTAL ASSETse . . . ... . ...... ... .. .. . L1 A81L1T1ES AN D CAPITAL ACCOU NTS (In thousands of doll a rs ) De ma nd de posits of banks • . . • • • .. • • • .••• Other de mand deposits .. ... .... . . . ... ... Time d e posits •• . .•• •• . • • • ••• •••• ••• • • •• Item Oct. 23, 1963 Se pt. 18, 1963 Oct. 24, 1962 Totol gold ce rtiflcate rese rves •• • •• .• •• •• • • .• Disco unts for me mb er banks • ••••• •• •• • • • • • . Other d iscounts and adva nces •••• . ••••••• •• U. S. G o ve rnm ent securities •••••••• • . .• • • •• • Tota l e a rning a sse ts •• • ••••. . .••.•••.. • ..• • Me mb e r bank rese rve d e posits • •.• •• . • •• .. • • Fe d e ra l Rese rve not es In actual ci rculatio n •• • • • 577,024 25,895 1,7 10 1,281,4 13 1,309,0 18 905,295 949,224 588,353 14,875 1,710 1,300,631 1,317,216 914,656 947,689 637,747 10,905 596 1,206,595 1,2 18,096 994,683 871,88 1 Tota l deposits ... . .. ... .. .. . . . ... .. .. Borrowings e • .. • • . . . •• . •• •• . • •• .••• .. . • O ther liabllities e • . . . .• •. • . •••••• •.. •• .. Total capital accountsC e- 2 Estima te d. - BANK DEBITS, END-Of-MONTH DEPOSITS AND ANNUAL RATE Of TURNOVER Of DEPOSITS INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION (Sea sonally adiust.d Indexes, 1957·59 = 100) (Dollar amounts in thousands) Sept em b er Dema nd d e posits 1 de posit accoun ts l Annual rate of turnover Percent chang e from S. pt.mb.r 1963 Aug . 1963 S. pt. 1962 S. pt.30, 1963 S. pt. 1963 Aug . 1963 S. pt. 1962 ARIZONA Tucson ••••.. •• . . .. •• $ LOUISIANA 27 1,135 -10 - 13 $ 162,4 17 20.8 23.5 25.2 Monroe .. ........... Shreveport •... .. .... 92,661 330,985 -2 -2 15 17 55,404 178,137 20.9 22.9 22.1 23.3 54,484 -1 9 35,020 18.8 19.3 15.7 3 8 1 14 -15 4 0 21 4 -13 8 5 - 7 13 8 -3 -2 7 10 - 9 14 -3 -4 -8 -3 -13 - 7 - 1 7 -2 10 -4 17 -2 15 -4 1 -3 17 0 70,807 125,393 165,351 106,760 119,084 22,167 1,320,558 174,135 409,518 63,484 1,516,601 25,875 125,535 41,201 51,283 421,399 18,726 69,470 72,883 103,851 17.6 23.2 19.8 22.8 20.8 11.6 30.0 23.9 23.8 19.3 25.9 15.2 19.8 17.4 13.6 20.4 18.6 17.2 20.3 14.2 17.3 23.3 24.0 22.9 24.1 11.3 32.6 24.4 24.4 21.8 27.1 16.8 20.9 18.4 13.9 21.4 19.2 17.9 21.1 14.2 15.7 21.4 20.8 19.7 21.5 11.8 27.1 21.1 23.2 17.0 24.1 16.4 18.5 16.9 13.6 19.1 15.2 16.6 20.2 13.2 $5,455,059 24.5 25.9 22.8 NEW MEXICO Rosw. II .. .... ....... TEXAS Abll. ne ...... ..... .. Ama rillo ............ Austin .. .. ... ... ... . Be aumont • ... ....•. . Corpus Christi ••••.•.• Corsicana ......... . . Dallas • •••. .. •.•.... EI Paso .. ...•..•.•.. Fort Worth ... ....... Galveston .. . .... . ; . . Houston •••. ....••.. lare do .... . ....... . LUbbock ....... . .... Port Arthur •....... .. San Ang olo ... " .. .. San Antonio • .... .. .. Tex arkana :! •.... .... Tyler ....... .. ...... Waco . ... .. ... . ... . Wichita Falls •.. . . .•• 103,321 23 6,835 266,566 199,76 1 203,419 20,880 3,292,619 337,358 802,783 97,115 3,249,620 32,779 200,308 60,324 57,729 709,320 29, 180 99,187 120,934 120,802 Total_24 citl.s •• . •.. . . $ 10,990,105 1 11 - 5 1963 July 1963 Se ptember 123 135 132 137 106 120 131 126 135 107 121 133 129 135 107 11 7 130 126 132 100 126 126 125 127 110 144 126 126 125 127 111 144 127 127 127r 126 111 145r 120 120 11 9 122 106 133 TEXAS Total industrial production • •• . •••• Manufacturing ... .. .... .. . •.. Durabl •• •. •.•••••.•••.•.• Nondurabl ••••••.•.•... .. • Mining .. ................... UNITED STATES 19.7 20.2 Area Aug ust 1963p Area and typ e of index Debits to de mand Deposits of individual s, partnerships, and corporations and of states and po litical SUbdi visions. b • Th.se figures include only two banks in Texarkana, Texa s. Total debits for all Total industrial production •••..•.. Manufacturing . . . ..... . .. .... Durabl •• • •..••••• . ••••••• Nondurable • ••••. . .... .•• • Mining .. ..... .............. Utilitie s. ..... . .... . ..... ... . p r - Pre liminary. Revise d . Boord of Governors of th e Federal Reserve System. SOURCES , Federal Rese rve Bank of Dallas. NONAGRICULTURAL EMPLOYMENT five Southwestern States" Percent chang e S. pt. 1963 from Number of p ersons 1963p August 1963 Sept. mb.r 1962r Aug. 1963 4,785,900 828,000 3,957,900 237,600 341,900 4,752,600 825,000 3,927,600 240,500 343,700 4,676,900 8 12,100 3,864,800 243,000 313,800 0.7 .4 .8 -1.2 -.5 2.3 2.0 2.4 -2.2 9.0 395,700 1,140,400 240,400 670,500 931 ,400 395,600 1,136,900 242,500 674,200 894,200 397,000 1,124,800 232,400 650,900 902,900 .0 .3 - .9 -.5 4.2 - .3 Septemb er Type of employment Total nonagricultural wag e and salary workers • • Manufacturing • .. .• •..... Nonmanufacturin g .... .. . . Mining .. ...... ... . . .. Construction .. . ... .... . Transportation ond anks in Texarkana, Toxa s.A rkan sa s, includin g on e bank located in th e Eighth Di strict, amounted to $66, 620,000 for the month of Septem ber 1963 . public utilltle, •••• .. .• Trado ... ......... . .. . Financ e ••..... .• ...•.. Service •. ..... . .•. . ••• Governm ent • . ... .. . ... 1 DEPARTMENT STORE SALES 1962 Sept. 1962 1.4 3.4 3.0 3.2 Arizona , Lou isi ana, N ew M ex i co, O klahoma, and Texa s. Pre liminary. Revised. p - r - SOURCE, Statc employment ag encies. (Pe rcentag e change in retail value) S. pt. mb. r 1963 from Augu, t 1963 Area Total Eleventh Di strict. . ... .. . . ~orpus Christi ............... . ~:~~~~n:.:.:::::::::::::: ::: : : San Antonio .. . . .. . . ....•.... ~re veportl La ..... ....... .. . Oth~~'citi~;:: : : :::: ::::: :: :: Septem b er 1962 9 months, 1963 from 1962 BU ILDING PERM ITS 4 2 3 -2 -16 -26 - 15 -22 -14 -17 -1 4 - 14 -1 8 - 6 1 - 9 o VALUATION (Dollar amounts in thousands) 5 4 7 2 2 1 -2 7 - 1 -7 Percent chang e Sept. 1963 NUMBER Sept. 1963 9 mos . 689 290 from Sept. 1963 9 mos . 6,385 2,590 123 263 342 232 305 1,968 365 631 140 1,705 180 105 69 112 1,139 282 111 Total-19 cltl.s •• 9,051 Are a 9 months, 1963 Aug. 1963 S. pt. 1962 $ 2,220 $ 24,888 -25 19 -22 2,674 22,389 16 1,027 2,517 3,170 2,382 2,875 19,661 3,784 5,5 11 1,432 17,345 1,752 906 642 1,085 10,550 2,258 994 1,204 2,677 8,955 701 1,116 11,724 2,365 3,93 9 341 25,669 1,772 626 755 433 5,559 807 2,166 12,309 33,776 65,776 10,759 20,037 183,452 34,954 39,342 10,916 259,139 32,192 9,922 6,381 3,790 45,381 13,42 1 11 ,369 18 -29 14 -41 - 63 -47 -13 60 -49 3 -47 -41 -34 73 38 -39 189 -10 17 76 -17 -62 -25 67 88 -37 13 -59 -54 106 -8 0 -7 37 -24 22 36 -17 lB -5 9 15 -37 -2 2 -24 -16 -26 -7 16 28 86,866 $75,703 $840,193 -13 4 0 1963 1963 from 1962 AR IZONA Tucson •• •.. ... LOUISIANA Shrev. port ••.• TEXAS Abilene .•• •••• Amarillo .....• Austin ........ INDEXES Of DEPARTMENT STORE SJliLES AND STOCKS Eleventh federal Reserve District (1957-59 = 100) SALES (Daily av.rag o) Date Unadju, t. d Sea sonally adlusted 1962. S. ptember. • • • • 1963. April.......... May.. ........ June.......... July..... .. .. .. August. ....... S.ptemb.r. • • . . 109 108 106 103 103 113 107 113 110 110 115 114 112 111 Beaumont •. ... STOCKS (End of month) Unadlusted 117 117 116 111 115 119 120p Seasonally adjusted 110 114 118 118 120 117 113p --------------------------------------------------------P- Corpus Christl .. Dallas .. . ..... EI Paso ... .... Fort Worth .. .. Ga lveston •• • • • Houston • • . . . . Lubbock • ••••• Midland • • •••• Odessa .... ... Port Arthur .... San Antonio •.• Waco ••. • . •. . Wichita Fall, •• 37 Pre liminary . 3 MARKETED PRODUCTION OF NATURAL GAS VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS (In millions of dollars) Seasonally adJust.d ind.x (1957-59=100) _ In millions of cubic feet January-Sep tember FIVE SOUTHWESTERN STATES' •••••• • •• • •••••• Residential building • ••• ••• Nonresidential building • • •• Public works and utilities ••• UNITED STATES ............ Residential building •• • • ••• Nonresidential building •••• Public works and utilities ... 1 August 1963 1962 1963p Second First Second 444 212 136 97 4,06 1 1,883 1,322 857 359 140 107 113 3,273 1,519 1,019 735 3,643 1,675 1,023 944 34, 181 15,662 10,929 7,590 3,320 1,428 1,009 883 31,614 13,944 9,997 7,672 813,100 183,700 215,800 1,422,600 179 109 130 11 4 166 110 136 111 162 107 126 109 2,635,200 130 127 123 First Second quarter quarter 1963 i963 1962 Louisiana ... .. . .... New Mexico ...... .. Texas . ...... ...... 898,000 186,800 222,900 1,490,300 . 1,032,900 218,200 251,000 1,587,300 Total .... .. ... . .. 2,798,000 ~,089,400 1962 390 185 92 11 2 3;707 1,789 1,154 764 Second September 1963p quarter Area September Area and type Oklahoma ••••• •• •• t qr96·;r qr96·;r qr96 ;r SOURCES. U. S. Bu roa u of Mines. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. Arizona, Louisiana, New Mexico , Oklahoma, and Texas. p - Preliminary. NOTE. - Details may not add to totals because of rounding. SOURCE : F. W. Dodge Corporation. NATIONAL PE'J1ROLEUM ACTIVITY INDICATORS (Seasonally adjusted indexes, 1957-59 Percent change from Area 1963p 1963p 1962 August 1963 elEVENTH DiSTRiCT ••• ••• •• Texas . ............ ... .. Gulf Coast ••••• • • • •• •• West Texas ....... ... . East Texas (praper) •• • •• Panhandle .. . ... .. . ... Rest of State .. ........ 3,102.0 2,679.8 502.3 1,227.3 106.0 106.0 738.2 272.3 149.9 4,478.9 7,580 .9 3,134.5 2,710.5 512.6 1,253.6 112.8 105.7 725.8 271 .5 152.5 4,509.5 7,644.0 2,950.6 2,541.1 476.3 1, 130.0 116.8 104.3 713.7 269.1 140.4 4,390.2 7,340.8 - 1.0 -1.1 -2.0 -2.1 -6.0 .3 1.7 .3 -1.7 -.7 -.8 Southeastern New Mexico .. Northern louisiana .•.....• OUTSIDE ELEVENTH DISTRICT. UNITED STATES ............ August September 1962 Indicator S.ptember 1963p CRUDE OIL RUNS TO REFINERY STILLS (Dally average). • • • • • • • • • • • .. • DEMAND (Dally av.rage) Gasolln..... .. ....... . ............. 111 109 108 112 107 165 114 96 108 107 113 104 87 104 (In thousands of barrels) September = 100) = DAILY AVERAGE PRODUCTION OF CRUDE OIL Se ptember September 1962 5.1 5.5 5.5 8.6 -9.3 1.6 3.4 1.2 6.8 2.0 3.3 August 1963p Kerosene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . • • 184 Distillate fuol oil..... • ••• •• ••• ••• . .. . Residual fu.1 ail.. • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • .. • Four reflned prod ucts. • • • • • • • • • • .. • STOCKS (End of month) Gasoline......... .... ....... . .. .... K.rosene. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .. .. • Distillate fuel oil..... . .... . ... ... .... Residua l fuel oil.. • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • four reflned products. • • • • • • • • • • • • • 129 93 11 4 110 156 119 91 110 110 109 106 84 105 109 117 107 90 106 p - Pre liminary . SOURCES . Amorican Petroleum Institute. U. S. Bureau of Mines . Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. p - Preliminary. SOURCES: American Petroleum Institute . U. S. Bureau of Mines. Federa l Reserve Bank of Dallas. CROP PRODUCTION (In thousands of bushe ls) COTTON PRODUCTION Texas Crap Reporting Districts (In thousands of bales - 500 pounds gross weight) Crap 1963, indicated Oct. 1 1962 1961 9 - Coastal Prairies • . • .. .•....•. . 10-N - South T.xa s Plains •••• • .••• •• 10-S -Lower Rio Grande Valley ...... 500 1,620 300 360 15 500 40 80 280 45 125 100 220 50 265 584 1,730 287 320 17 444 29 63 251 35 123 157 212 61 413 522 1,839 379 429 23 410 31 66 287 71 82 161 102 54 330 86 94 105 113 88 11 3 138 127 112 129 102 64 104 82 64 State .......................... 4,500 4,726 4,786 95 Area l-N l-S 2-N 2-S 3 4 - Northern Southern Red Bed Red Bed High Plains .. .. ...... High Plains ••••••• •• • Plains ••••••••• ••• •• Plains ... ........... - Western Cross Timbers .•..... . - Black and Grand Prairies •••• • • S-N - East Texas Timbered Plains • ... 5-5 - East Texes Timbered Plains • .. • 6 7 - Trans-Pecos .... .... .... ..... - Edwards Plateau ...... . . .... . 8-N - Southern Texes Prairies ••.••.. 8-5 - Southern Texas Prairies . ..... . SOURCE, U. S. Department of Agriculture. 4 .;::::::. FIVE SOUTHWESTERN STATES' TEXAS 1963 as percent of 1962 Cotton l •• •• ••• •• Corn •••• ••• ••• • Winter wheat •••• Oats . •... ...... Barley ......... Rye ............ Rice' .. ... .. . . . . Sorghum grain .. • Flaxseed •• • •••• Hay· •••• •••..•• Peanuts 5 ••••• •• • Irish potatoes ' .. • ~:ceae:s~~~~t.o.e.s~ : 1 2 3 1963, estlmatod Oct. 1 1962 4,500 25,032 37,406 14,576 4,200 375 16,946 226,760 635 1,915 2 12,160 2,646 975 40,000 4,726 32,612 43,696 15,932 3,859 253 15,801 201,006 188 2,278 222,400 2,524 1,530 14,000 1963, Average Average estimated 1957-61 Oct. 1 1962 1957-61 4,298 35,820 64,329 30,406 8,564 314 12,135 248,304 729 2, 177 204,783 2,36 1 1,173 32,860 6,530 37,010 118,277 21,286 22,822 1,215 33,456 262,661 635 6,169 382,740 6,004 5,457 96,000 6,794 43,654 121,577 23,787 22,387 775 31,295 237,074 188 6,968 401,025 5,429 5,738 33,500 6,146 53,674 168,296 48,408 33,989 973 24,309 281 ,808 729 6,440 348,442 5,260 5,299 80,340 Arizona, louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. In thousands of bales. In thousands of bags containing 100 pounds each. , In thousands of tons. G In thousands of pounds. o In thousands of hundredweight. SOURCE. U. S. Department of Agriculture. --- ---
