Laserfiche WebLink
<br />elllphdS -j ze har"'ves teu cr'ops because in iTlOS t year's <br /> <br />- --=--_....,... ..._^"...,+ <br />d ~ 1.Lt'QUIt: OllIVur.... <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />- <br /> <br />only has a limited irrigation at present, and we are prob- <br /> <br /> <br />ably using only about one-half of the water used in the <br /> <br />fifties. " <br /> <br />Area-wide, the trend for the nine counties shows a less pro- <br />nounced decline than in Hockley County alone, as reported in the <br />several U.S. Census of Agriculture publications for five-year in- <br />tervals 1959 to 1974 and as reported in the Texas County Statis- <br />tics for 1979. Two trends seem evident from Table IV-8. First, <br />the total cropland harvested has been quite stable over the last <br />20-year period, with 1959 appearing to be an unusually good year <br />for the harvesting of dryland crops planted, thus causing a bulge <br />in the total. This kind of variant often shows in infrequent- <br />year rather than continuous statistical time-series. Second, there <br />is a gradual but uninterrupted decline in irrigated cropland har- <br />vested. The amount is fairly significant for the size of area -- <br />300,000 acres in 20 years, or roughly 16 percent, although this is <br />less than one percent per annum. The trends by counties within the <br />area are mixed. Annual data by crops give a better understanding <br />of what has taken place. Also, it is said that U.S. Census data <br />and the Texas Department of Agriculture, County Statistical Data, <br />sometimes differo What follows are data exclusively from the <br />annual statistical publications of the State of Texas. <br />We have examined the most recent 13-year record of harvested <br />crop acres, yields, and production for the nine counties. We <br /> <br />IV-40 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Arthur D Little, Incl <br />