<br />fi", ~ ! '" ')
<br />
<br />-.- .,
<br />::,.,~
<br />
<br />Missouri River Basin
<br />Comprehensive Framevork Studies
<br />
<br />,
<br />
<br />>,
<br />,
<br />
<br />.~r-:
<br />
<br />~ .,'
<br />
<br />Economic Base StudY'"
<br />
<br />One of the basic precepts of the Comprehensive Framevork Study of
<br />the Missouri Basin is that this plan viII be based on projected future
<br />economic conditions. This study viII, t!lerefore, be based on people
<br />and their needs, now and in the future, not J~st on current problems.
<br />To give a better understanding of the projected future, it is well to
<br />take a brief look at the present and past trends. In 1960, the last
<br />census year, the Missouri Basin had a total population of 7,931,000.
<br />Of this total population, 2,985,000 were employed. Employment in
<br />agriculture totaled 512,000; manufacturing, 411,000; other commodity-
<br />producing industries, 216,000; and in the non-commodity sector 1,846,000
<br />people. The per capita income vas $1,813.
<br />
<br />.p..
<br />
<br />,.
<br />
<br />.;
<br />
<br />-. -'.'
<br />
<br />t"_..
<br />
<br />.;'
<br />
<br />.......',
<br />
<br />Brief comparison with the U. S. indicates that in 1960 population
<br />of the Basin was 4.5 percent of the Nation. Employment was the same
<br />proportion in the Missouri Basin as in the U. S. and the per capita
<br />income vas about 91 percent of the average U. S. income. From 19J~0 to
<br />1960 the U. S. population increased 33.6 percent, while the Missouri
<br />Basin only increased 17.1 percent. In large part, this may be ascribed
<br />to the exodus of rural farm population which started in the 1930's. The
<br />total population of the Basin increased from 6,772,000 in 1940 to
<br />7,931,000 in 1960. During the sam~ period urban population increased
<br />from 2,728,000 to 4,556,000; rural non-farm population from 1,571,000 to
<br />1,903,000, but.farm population decreased from 2,472,000 to 1,472,000.
<br />
<br />:;:-;i'
<br />~i;:
<br />;.,.v<
<br />If-''''.
<br />
<br />,.
<br />""~->
<br />
<br />.
<br />.,
<br />;<iv"~
<br />..
<br />.',".
<br />
<br />:.'
<br />
<br />,.., "
<br />
<br />The eight planning subregions in the Missouri Basin had similar
<br />changes vith the Platte-Niobrara region showing the greatest growth
<br />over all, and the Eastern Dakota Tributaries the least growth. Similar
<br />comparisons can be made for employment and income. This can be broadly
<br />interpreted to tndicate what most of us already know _ that the
<br />Missouri Basin was predominantly an agricultural region but agriculture
<br />and agri-business being tbe predominant economic activity in the Basin.
<br />This has been changing during the more recent years with the Basin be-
<br />coming more urbanized and industrialized and agricultural influence
<br />lessening somewhat although it is still a dominant characteristic of the
<br />Basin. For, although farm employment and farm population had been de-
<br />creasing, tbe total land area in farms has stayed relatively constant.
<br />
<br />{."
<br />
<br />'..-:.::
<br />
<br />F.,
<br />~
<br />~"'"
<br />
<br />,<.:.'
<br />
<br />,
<br />. :' ~
<br />{',~
<br />
<br />;.",.:.
<br />:'-'>"
<br />
<br />. <
<br />....",
<br />.F~.,<
<br />t~::.\
<br />$-",<
<br />.~'-' '-
<br />.~/'~:
<br />
<br />,.
<br />
<br />'-.<
<br />
<br />4 Presentation of this subject made by Charles Haj1nian, FWPCA, Chairman
<br />of the Economic Base Study Work Group
<br />
<br />.
<br />.,
<br />,
<br />
<br />21
<br />
<br />~'"
<br />
<br />: -,.,~ -. .-:
<br />
<br />"','
<br />
<br />..
<br />
<br />'~-:;-; ~;::~
<br />
<br />."-
<br /><.
<br />",,+"':;'_~~"'r_
<br />
<br />I;", ..A:,'>'<:,~:.Y<;~:'.r:~ .,':
<br />;.-t-........"~.c.:.-y~:-JIO."..~.
<br />
<br />,
<br />
<br />,
<br />,
<br />
<br />,.
<br />
<br />......._ ,W
<br />
<br />'....
<br />
<br />,.--
<br />
<br />"".A~ ...~...
<br />
<br />-
<br />
<br />- ""t'
<br />
|