west texas region 10 county level impacts of oil and gas phase 2

7/13/2019 West Texas Region 10 County Level Impacts of Oil and Gas Phase 2

1/191

1

West Texas Energy Consortium Region: TenCounty-Level Economic Impacts of Oil andGas ActivitiesCenter for Community and Business Research at The University of Texas at San Antonios Institute for

Economic Development


2/191

2

Acknowledgements

This report was performed by the University of Texas at San Antonio Institute for Economic

Developments Center for Community of Business Research. The project was supportedwith funding

from the West Texas Energy Consortium. Any finding, conclusions or opinion are those of the authors

and not necessarily those reflected by The University of Texas at San Antonio or the West Texas Energy

Consortium.

Javier Oyakawa, M.A., M.Sc., Lead Investigator

Thomas Tunstall, PhD, Principal Investigator

Research Assistants: Gina Conti, Hector Torres, Ricardo Avalos, Jason Hernandez, Binbin Wang, John

Rodriguez, Neeraj Ravi, Feihua Teng, and Christina Valerino.

Hisham Eid, GIS specialist


3/191

3

Contents

1.Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................... 2

2. Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................. 8

3. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 17

The West Texas Energy Consortium and the Severance Tax ................................................................. 17

4. Fisher County .......................................................................................................................................... 20

Overview of Fisher County ....................................................................................................................... 20

Per Capita Income, Population, and Industries ........................................................................................ 21

Population Growth Comparison ............................................................................................................... 22

Job Growth Comparison .......................................................................................................................... 23

Natural Resource and Mining Employment Growth Comparison ............................................................ 24 Location Quotients for Natural Resource and Mining Employment ......................................................... 25

Population Projections ............................................................................................................................. 27

Total Employment Forecast for Fisher County in 2014-2022 .................................................................. 28

Educational Attainment ............................................................................................................................ 29

Amounts Subject to State Sales Tax........................................................................................................ 30

Employment Changes .............................................................................................................................. 31

Commuting Patterns ................................................................................................................................ 32

Economic Impacts in 2012 ....................................................................................................................... 33


5. Glasscock County ................................................................................................................................... 35

Overview of Glasscock County ................................................................................................................ 35




Natural Resource and Mining Employment Growth Comparison ............................................................ 39

Location Quotients for Natural Resource and Mining Employment ......................................................... 40


Total Employment Forecast for Glasscock County in 2014-2022 ............................................................ 43



County Budgets ........................................................................................................................................ 46



4/191

4




6. Howard County ........................................................................................................................................ 51

Overview of Howard County .................................................................................................................... 51Per Capita Income, Population, and Industries ........................................................................................ 52






Total Employment Forecast for Howard County in 2014-2022 ................................................................ 59

Building Permits ....................................................................................................................................... 60



County Budgets ........................................................................................................................................ 63





7. Irion County ............................................................................................................................................. 68

Overview of Irion County .......................................................................................................................... 68







Total Employment Forecast for Irion County in 2014-2022 ..................................................................... 76

Educational Attainment ............................................................................................................................ 77Amounts Subject to State Sales Tax........................................................................................................ 78

County Budgets ........................................................................................................................................ 79





5/191

5


8. Martin County .......................................................................................................................................... 84

Overview of Martin County ....................................................................................................................... 84


Population Growth Comparison ............................................................................................................... 86Job Growth Comparison .......................................................................................................................... 87




Total Employment Forecast for Martin County in 2014-2022 .................................................................. 92

Building Permits ....................................................................................................................................... 93







9. Mitchell County ...................................................................................................................................... 100

Overview of Mitchell County ................................................................................................................... 100

Per Capita Income, Population, and Industries ...................................................................................... 101

Population Growth Comparison ............................................................................................................. 102

Job Growth Comparison ........................................................................................................................ 103

Natural Resource and Mining Employment Growth Comparison .......................................................... 104

Location Quotients for Natural Resource and Mining Employment ....................................................... 105

Population Projections ........................................................................................................................... 107

Total Employment Forecast for Mitchell County in 2014-2022 .............................................................. 108

Building Permits ..................................................................................................................................... 109

Educational Attainment .......................................................................................................................... 110

Amounts Subject to State Sales Tax...................................................................................................... 111

Employment Changes ............................................................................................................................ 112Commuting Patterns .............................................................................................................................. 113

Economic Impacts in 2012 ..................................................................................................................... 114


10. Nolan County ......................................................................................................................................... 116

Overview of Nolan County ..................................................................................................................... 116


6/191

6





Location Quotients for Natural Resource and Mining Employment ....................................................... 121 Population Projections ........................................................................................................................... 123

Total Employment Forecast for Nolan County in 2014-2022 ................................................................. 124




County Budgets ...................................................................................................................................... 128

Employment Changes ............................................................................................................................ 129

Commuting Patterns .............................................................................................................................. 130



11. Reagan County ..................................................................................................................................... 133

Overview of Reagan County .................................................................................................................. 133







Total Employment Forecast for Reagan County in 2014-2022 .............................................................. 141




County Budgets ...................................................................................................................................... 145


Commuting Patterns .............................................................................................................................. 147Economic Impacts in 2012 ..................................................................................................................... 148


12. Scurry County ........................................................................................................................................ 150

Overview of Scurry County .................................................................................................................... 150



7/191

7





Population Projections ........................................................................................................................... 157Total Employment Forecast for Scurry County in 2014-2022 ................................................................ 158




County Budgets ...................................................................................................................................... 162





13. Sterling County ...................................................................................................................................... 167

Overview of Sterling County ................................................................................................................... 167







Total Employment Forecast for Sterling County in 2014-2022 .............................................................. 175







14.Appendices ............................................................................................................................................ 182Appendix A: County Budgets and Road Expenditures .......................................................................... 182

Appendix B: West Texas Consortium Hotel Occupancy Data ............................................................... 183

15. References ............................................................................................................................................ 186


8/191

8

Executive Summary

The oil and gas industry in the core 10-county area of the WTxEC in 2012 had an impact close to $14.5

billion, supported nearly 21,450 full-time jobs, paid $1 billion in wages and salaries, generated almost$472 million in state revenues including $187 million in severance taxes added approximately $6.2

billion in gross regional product, and contributed nearly $447 million in local governments revenues.

By 2022, those impacts will grow to $20.5 billion in output, supporting 30,500 full-time jobs, paying $1.8

billion in wages and salaries, generating $701 million in state revenues including $334 million in

severance taxes creating close to $9.4 billion in gross regional product, and contributing about $664

million in local government revenues.

Selected GIS software provided by Caliper Corporation; Newton, MA. http://www.caliper.com/Center for Community and Business Research.

Taking into consideration low- and high-price scenarios, the impacts in 2022 could vary widely. This

study estimates scenarios where low prices of oil in the future could produce an output as low as $7.6

billion, and where high prices of oil could see enormous growth, as high as $34.3 billion. The ranges of

these figures are broad due to high variability in the prices of oil and gas, the challenges of forecasting

future oil and gas activities, changes in the number of wells per rig, and changes in productivity per well.
http://www.caliper.com/http://www.caliper.com/http://www.caliper.com/http://www.caliper.com/


9/191

9

Low

Estimate Moderate Estimate

High

Estimate

Output $7,589 $20,524 $34,29

Employment 11,822 30,540 49,69

Payroll $714 $1,865 $3,04

Gross Regional Product $3,371 $9,434 $16,22

Estimated Local Government Revenues $226 $664 $1,19

Estimated State Revenue, incl. severance taxes $238 $701 $1,25

* 2012 dollars

Estimated Impacts for West Texas Energy Consortium

at the Regional Level 2022 in millions of dollars *

Total Impact Three Scenarios

Source: IMPLAN software version 3, database 2011.


10/191

10

The effects across different counties are diverse. For 2012, in terms of output, the most affected

counties are Howard ($4.2 billion), Martin ($2.8 billion), and Scurry ($1.9 billion). For 2022, Howard

appears in first place ($4.4 billion), Reagan in second place ($4.3 billion), and Irion in third place ($3.2

billion). Fisher and Sterling counties appear to be affected the least among the 14 counties with $2.9

billion and $2.7 billion in 2012 and 2022, respectively.

Source: CCBR Estimations using IMPLAN software version 3, database 2011

Total Output Impacts

County 2012 Total

Output Impact, in

millions of $

County 2022 Total

Output Impact,

in millions of $

Howard $4,238.9 Howard $4,461.0

Martin $2,863.2 Reagan $4,359.9

Scurry $1,903.4 Irion $3,238.9

Reagan $1,771.5 Martin $2,666.7

Glasscock $1,468.7 Glasscock $1,871.2

Irion $856.7 Nolan $1,484.7

Mitchell $727.0 Mitchell $1,080.8

Nolan $556.8 Scurry $564.6

Sterling $178.9 Fisher $384.9

Fisher $176.3 Sterling $383.2


11/191

11


In terms of employment, the most impacted counties in 2012 are Martin (4,610 full-time jobs), Scurry

(2,966 full-time jobs), and Howard (2,808 full-time jobs). For 2022, the three most impacted counties are

Reagan (5,131 full-time jobs), Irion (4,586 full-time jobs), and Martin (4,002 full-time jobs). Similar to the

output impacts, Sterling appears among the least impacted with 275 and 637 full-time jobs in 2012 and

2022, respectively. Something similar occurs to Fisher.

Total Employment Impacts

County

2012 TotalFull-Time

Employment

County2022 TotalFull-Time

Employment

Martin 4,610 Reagan 5,131

Scurry 2,966 Irion 4,586Howard 2,808 Martin 4,002

Reagan 2,600 Nolan 3,714

Glasscock 1,657 Howard 2,783

Nolan 1,640 Glasscock 1,884

Mitchell 1,348 Mitchell 1,810

Irion 1,247 Scurry 1,208

Fisher 394 Sterling 637

Sterling 275 Fisher 590


12/191

12

Between the fourth quarter of 2011 to the fourth quarter of 2012, for the aggregate of all 10 counties,

employment increased by 737 jobs, a 2.20 percent increase. For the 10 counties, the highest growth rate

corresponds to other services (8.80 percent increase); followed by the natural resources & mining sector

(8.00 percent increase), and the manufacturing sector (7.80 percent increase).

Employment Changes in 10-County Region

2011 4thQuarter to 2012 4thQuarter

IndustryEmployment 2011

4thQuarter

Employment 2012

4th Quarter

Employment

Change

Percent Growth,

2011-2012

Other Services 894 973 79 8.80%

Natural Resources &Mining

4,910 5,304 394 8.00%

Manufacturing 2,029 2,187 158 7.80%

Leisure & HospitalityGroup

2,693 2,884 191 7.10%

Construction 2,213 2,338 125 5.60%

Education & HealthServices

9,219 9,333 114 1.20%

Trade, Transport. &Utilities

6,904 6,855 -49 -0.70%

Financial Activities Group 1,048 1,018 -30 -2.80%

Information 232 224 -8 -3.40%

Public Administration 2,474 2,319 -155 -6.30%

Professional Business &Other Services 1,105 1,023 -82 -7.40%

Total, All Industries 33,721 34,458 737 2.20%Source: Texas Workforce Commission, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages data, from 2001 to 2012

Employment changes by the Texas Workforce Commission are based on establishments paying

employment insurance and do not include the self-employed. These statistics do not include the number

of workers living in hotels, RV parks, and man camps, among other lodging facilities.1

1These differences are discussed in Javier OyakawaAFrameworkfortheStudyandForecastofLaborForce,Employment,Population,Migration,andCommuteChangesintheEagleFordShale . Paper presented at the 44th

Annual Conference of the Urban Affairs Association. March 19-22, 2014, San Antonio, Texas.


13/191

13


The gross county product (GCP) impacts provide a better picture of the benefits obtained from oil and

gas activities because these values include only earnings and surplus, and do not double count them as

might happen with the output numbers. For 2012, in terms of GCP, the most impacted counties are

Martin ($1.3 billion), Howard ($1.1 billion), and Scurry ($985 million). For 2022, Reagan ranks first ($2.1

billion) Irion is second place ($1.5 billion), and Martin takes the third place ($1.3 billion).

Total Gross County Product Impacts

County

2012 TotalGross

County ProductImpact, in

millions of $County

2022 TotalGross

County ProductImpact, in

millions of $

Martin $1,388.1 Reagan $2,134.0

Howard $1,154.0 Irion $1,524.7

Scurry $985.0 Martin $1,385.3

Reagan $817.9 Howard $1,191.8

Glasscock $686.4 Glasscock $934.2

Irion $385.0 Nolan $757.9

Mitchell $343.4 Mitchell $557.0





14/191

14

The estimated state revenue provides a better picture of the economic benefits that the state of Texas

gathered in 2012.This state revenue was then broken down by the amount gathered by each respective

county. For 2012, the counties with the highest estimated state revenue are Martin ($116 million),

Scurry ($85 million), and Glasscock ($61 million). Based on the predictions and calculations, the counties

with the highest estimated state revenue for 2022 are Reagan ($157 million), Irion ($117 million) and

Martin ($115 million).

Estimated State Revenue 2012 and 2022

County

EstimatedState

Revenue

2012,in

millions of $ County

EstimatedState

Revenue2022, in

millions $

Martin $115.7 Reagan $157.0

Scurry $85.1 Irion $117.3

Glasscock $61.8 Martin $114.9

Reagan $61.3 Glasscock $81.5

Howard $54.6 Nolan $58.0

Irion $31.6 Howard $52.6







15/191

15

The estimated local revenue provides a better picture of the economic benefits that each individual

county locally acquired throughout 2012. For 2012, the counties with the highest estimated local

revenue are Martin ($110 million), Scurry ($80 million), and Glasscock ($58 million). Based on

predictions and calculations, the counties with the highest estimated local revenue for 2022 are Reagan

($149 million), Irion ($111 million), and Martin ($109 million).

Estimated Local Revenues 2012 and 2022

County

Estimated Local

Revenues

2012, in

millions of $ County

Estimated

Local

Revenue

2022, in

millions of $

Martin $109.5 Reagan $148.6

Scurry $80.4 Irion $111.3

Glasscock $58.3 Martin $108.9

Reagan $58.0 Glasscock $77.1

Howard $51.8 Nolan $55.0

Irion $29.9 Howard $50.0







16/191

16

Another indicator of the benefits from the West Texas oil and gas production is the amount of sales

taxes that these counties generate, divided into four quarters, between 2002 and 2012. The 10-county

areas total sales subject to state sales tax had an increase of $340.0 million by the end this time span.

The following graph shows the original values in blue and the smoothed values in red. The smoothed

values represent a four-quarter average.

Source: Texas Comptroller office, historic sales tax data.


17/191

17

Introduction

The West Texas Energy Consortium is an open forum for coordination and information sharing,

organized by the Workforce Solutions Boards in the Concho Valley, West Central Texas, and PermianBasin regions. This is the second phase of a study that the WTxEC contracted with the Center for

Community and Business Research at The University of Texas at San Antonios Institute for Economic

Development to estimate the specific economic impacts of the oil and gas industry on each of the

following ten counties: Fisher, Glasscock, Howard, Irion, Martin, Mitchell, Nolan, Reagan, Scurry, and

Sterling.

The West Texas Energy Consortium and the Severance Tax

The West Texas Consortium is a 10-county region with active drilling. These counties include: Fisher,

Glasscock, Howard, Irion, Martin, Mitchell, Nolan, Reagan, Scurry, and Sterling. The following tables

detail the severance tax revenue for the ten counties in the consortium. The data was taken from the

Texas ComptrollersOffice and focuses on crude oil and natural gas tax revenue for the year 2012, as

well as the percent change from 2011 to 2012.

Table 0-1

Source: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts


18/191

18

Table 0-2


Reagan County had the highest revenue of the severance tax for crude oil in 2012, a staggering $23.6

million. Martin and Glasscock Counties had over $17 million, with Irion earning $12.8 million. Howard

County comes in fifth with a gross revenue for 2012 of $8.4 million. Glasscock County has the highest

percent change in crude oil revenue with an 80.7 percent increase from 2011 to 2012. Irion County saw

a 60.7 percent increase in severance tax revenue. The state of Texas as a whole saw a 44.3 percent

increase. Both Sterling and Howard County suffered a negative change in crude oil revenue from 2011

to 2012 with Howard losing the most at 9.1 percent.

Table 0-3



19/191

19

Table 0-4


The severance tax revenue for natural gas was the largest in Martin County totaling $79 million.

Glasscock came in second with $51.6 million. Reagan County, which had the highest revenue for crude

oil, was third in natural gas at just over $37.2 million. Scurry and Howard County round out the top five

with $27.1 and $22.9 million, respectively. Glasscock, similar to crude oil percent change, has the

highest percent change for natural gas tax revenue change with 77.6 percent. Scurry is a close second

with a 74.3 percent change. Both Glasscock and Scurry are well above the Texas percent change for

natural gas totaling 13.2 percent increase. Fisher, Sterling, and Mitchel County all suffered a negative

change in natural gas revenue with the last six counties all losing more than 10 percent.


20/191

20

Fisher County

Overview of Fisher County

Fisher County lies on TX-180, north of I-20. There are only three cities in Fisher County. Roby is thecounty seat, with a population of 643. Rotan and Hamlin are the other two cities, with half of Hamlin

lying in Jones County. It was named after Samuel Rhoads Fisher, a signer of the Texas Declaration of

Independence. Fisher County is one of 30prohibition, or entirelydry,counties in the state of Texas.

Figure 1-1

Source: Selected GIS software provided by Caliper Corporation; Newton, MA.

http://www.caliper.com/Center for Community and Business Research.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_countieshttp://www.caliper.com/http://www.caliper.com/http://www.caliper.com/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_counties


21/191

21

Per Capita Income, Population, and Industries

Fisher County has a population of 3,914 in 2011. The per capita personal income is $34,088 for 2011.

The top three employments by industry are farm employment, state and local government, and retail

trade; with government and government enterprises being the top industry by earnings.

Table 1-1

Fisher County

Population 3,914Per Capita Personal Income 34,088Total Employment 987

Farm Employment

Employment by Industry (Top 3) State and Local Government

Retail Trade

Government andGovernment Enterprises

Earnings by Industry (Top 3) Farms Earnings

Other Services, Except PublicAdministration

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), Regional Accounts


22/191

22

Population Growth Comparison

Fisher Countys population growth falls behind the rate of Texas and the study area, according to the

U.S. Census Bureau. By 2012, the population of Texas and the WTxEC study area has increased by 22.2percent and 2.7 percent, while the population of Fisher County has decreased by 9.7 percent when

compared to 2001.

Figure 1-2

Source: U.S. Census Bureau


23/191

23

Job Growth Comparison

Employment in Fisher County decreased 9.8 percent in the twelve-year study period. Fisher Countys

employment rate has not been consistent with the WTxEC study region or state, which have grownrespectively by 14.7 percent and 11.3 percent when compared to 2001.

Figure 1-3

Source: Texas Workforce Commission, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages data, from 2001 to 2012


24/191

24

Natural Resource and Mining Employment Growth Comparison

Employment in the natural resources and mining super sector increased 51.2 percent for the state of

Texas and 74.5 percent for the study area in the period between 2001 and 2012. In Fisher County, theemployment for the super-sector was not stable, peaking at 35.1 percent in 2005, decreasing to 13.0

percent in 2011, and decreasing 3.9 percent in 2012 when compared to 2001. The decline in

employment for the sector has followed the same trend as total employment, but has shown a higher

degree of turbulence.Figure 1-4



25/191

25

Location Quotients for Natural Resource and Mining Employment

Location quotients are useful in determining the significance of a particular job sector in the local

economy. This is determined by calculating the ratio of a particular job sector with total jobs in the localeconomy, then comparing that to the same ratio for the state level. A location quotient greater than 1.0

denotes a sector that has greater importance to the local economy than that for the state. A location

quotient less than 1.0 signifies that the sector is lessimportant to the local economy when compared to

the state.

Both Fisher County and the study area report a location quotient greater than 1.0 from 2001-2012 . The

natural resource and mining super sector has a greater significance in the Fisher County than in study

area from 2002 to 2006.


Figure 1-5


26/191

26

Table 1-6



27/191

27

Population Projections

The following table projects Fisher Countys population from 2000-2050. The projections are divided by

ethnicity. Each category contains the percent change. Fisher County is projected by the year 2050 to see

an overall decrease in population of 12.7 percent, a 34.4 percent decrease in Anglo population, a 5.9

percent increase in Black population, and a 59.7 percent increase in the Hispanic population.

Table 1-2


Year Total Change Anglo Change Black Change Hispanic Change Other Change

2000 4,344 - 3,271 - 118 - 928 - 27 -

2005 4,249 -2.2% 3,116 -4.7% 117 -0.8% 989 6.6% 27 0%

2010 3,974 -8.5% 2,797 -14.5% 124 5.1% 999 7.7% 54 100.0%

2015 3,984 -8.3% 2,731 -16.5% 130 10.2% 1,069 15.2% 54 100.0%

2020 4,001 -7.9% 2,656 -18.8% 135 14.4% 1,156 24.6% 54 100.0%

2025 4,005 -7.8% 2,583 -21.0% 137 16.1% 1,233 32.9% 52 92.6%

2030 3,984 -8.3% 2,484 -24.1% 138 16.9% 1,310 41.2% 52 92.6%

2035 3,949 -9.1% 2,383 -27.1% 134 13.6% 1,380 48.7% 52 92.6%

2040 3,883 -10.6% 2,295 -29.8% 133 12.7% 1,405 51.4% 50 85.2%

2045 3,841 -11.6% 2,224 -32.0% 130 10.2% 1,440 55.2% 47 74.1%

2050 3,794 -12.7% 2,146 -34.4% 125 5.9% 1,482 59.7% 41 51.9%

Source: Texas Workforce Commission as computed in 2012 by The Office of the State Demographer for the State of Texas


28/191

28

Table 1-3

Total Employment Forecast for Fisher County in 2014-2022

In order to estimate the Total Employment Forecast we used percentages of the super sectors for each

county using the forecasts for the corresponding Workforce Development Area (WDA) starting with the

base year (2014) and forecasting every year in between through 2022 (2020 figure provided by TWC).

For the period 2020-2022, it was assumed the same growth rate from previous years.

Year Total Employment Forecast

2014 936

2015 948

2016 961

2017 974

2018 987

2019 1000

2020 1013

2021 1026

2022 1040

Source: CCBR elaboration with Texas Workforce

Commissions forecasts for Workforce Development

Areas (WDAs) 2010-2020


29/191

29

Educational Attainment

Educational Attainment refers to the highest degree of education an individual has completed. In Fisher

County, 82.9 percent of its population has at least a high school diploma, and only 15.9 percent havecompleted their bachelors degree.

Table 1-4


Type of School Number Percent Educational Attainment Number Percent

Nursery school or preschool 52 5% Less than 9th grade 232 8%

Kindergarten 49 5% 9th-12th grade, no diploma 246 9%

Elementary (grades 1-8) 496 51% High school diploma or equiv. 1,147 41%

High School (grades 9-12) 308 32% Some college, no degree 571 20%

College or graduate school 70 7% Associate degree 157 6%

Total 975 Bachelor's degree 333 12%

Graduate or professional degree 112 4%Percent with high school diploma 82.9% Total 2,797

Percent with Bachelor's degree 15.9%Source: Texas Workforce Commission, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages data, from 2001 to 2012


30/191

30

Amounts Subject to State Sales Tax

Fisher Countys total sales subject tostate sales tax were 1.3 million in the first quarter of 2010 with an

increase to 2.5 million by the first quarter of 2013, an increase of 96 percent. Below is a 10-year

historical graph for Fisher County of the amount of total sales subject to state sales tax. The original

values are in blue and the smoothed values in red. The smoothed values represent a four-quarter sales

average.

Figure 1-7



31/191

31

Employment Changes

Between the fourth quarter of 2011 and the fourth quarter of 2012, for Fisher County, there was a 2.6

percent change in employment for all industries. Employment growth for the state of Texas for the same

period was 3.26 percent. The industry with the highest growth was Natural Resources and Mining with a

72.9 percent increase, and the industry with the highest negative growth in employment was

Construction, with a -53.8 percent change.

Table 1-5

Employment Changes by Sector

Industry Sector 2011 Q4 2012 Q4Employment

ChangePercentChange

Natural Resources and Mining 74 128 54 72.9%

Leisure and Hospitality 33 39 6 18.2%Public Administration 77 83 6 7.8%Prof., Business, and Other Services 35 37 2 5.7%Total, All Industries 800 821 21 2.6%Trade, Transportation, Utilities 161 156 -5 -3.0%Financial Activities 56 54 -2 -3.0%Education and Health Services 298 281 -17 -5.7%Other Services 27 25 -2 -7.0%Construction 39 18 -21 -53.8%Manufacturing n/a n/a n/a n/aInformation n/a n/a n/a n/a



32/191

32

Commuting Patterns

Using the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamic (LEHD) mapping programing, the commuting

patterns of residents and employees of the 10-county region shows where residents work and the

employees live. The commuting patterns for Fisher County can be seen below. When compared to the

other nine counties, Fisher County had the second highest percentage, at 69 percent, of employees who

live within one of the 10-counties with active drilling. They had the fourth highest percentage of

residents who work within the 10-county area.

There are 716 people employed in Fisher County. Of the total, 215 work in Scurry and live within one of

the 10-counties that are part of the study. The remaining 501 workers are employed in Fisher County

but live outside the 10-county study area.

Table 1-6

Commuting Patterns for EmployeesNumber Percentage

Live in 10-county area215 30.1%

Live outside 10-county area 501 69.9%

Total 716 100.0%Source: U.S. Census Bureaus On the Map

There are 1,431 workers who live in Fisher County. Of this total, 686 work within the 10-county study

area. The remaining 745 workers live in Fisher County but work outside the 10-county study area.

Table 1-7

Commuting Patterns for Residents

Number Percentage

Work in 10-county area686 47.9%

Work outside 10-county area745 52.1%

Total 1,431 100.0%Source: U.S. Census Bureaus On the Map


33/191

33

Economic Impacts in 2012

The following table shows the estimated impacts of the oil and gas industry on Fisher County in 2012.

The rows contain the estimated economic impact for 2012 in regards to the oil and gas industry. During

this period, the total output $176 million, a total of $77 million gross county product, and a total of 394

full-time employment.

The total estimated state revenue was $5 million, and an estimated severance tax of $1 million, with a

total amount of royalties of $16 million, and a total of $6 million lease payments. The drilling and

completion expenditures represented $60 million; followed by oil and gas production with $82 million.

Estimated Impacts in Fisher, 2012

Table 1-8

Economic Impacts

Direct Indirect Induced Total

Output $142,586,917 $23,282,178 $10,528,336 $176,397,432

Gross County Product $60,908,752 $10,381,581 $6,240,719 $77,531,052

Employment Full-Time 137 187 70 394

Payroll $10,781,696 $3,380,275 $1,134,293 $15,296,264

Estimated State Revenue $5,839,608Source: CCBR Estimations using IMPLAN software version 3, database 2011

Estimated Expenditures in Fisher, 2012Table 1-9

Severance Tax $1,972,909

Royalties $16,517,383

Lease Payments $6,580,070

Drilling and completion $60,000,000

Oil and gas production $82,586,916

1. Source: CCBR Estimations using IMPLAN software version 3 database 2011


34/191

34


The following table shows the estimated impacts of the shale activity on Fisher County. In 2022, it is

estimated that a total of 590 Fisher County jobs were supported by the 10-county area under analysis, in

addition to $384 million in output as well as over $198 million gross county product.

The total estimated state revenue is $17 million, and the total severance tax is $9.9 million with a total

of $81 million in royalties and a total of $3 million in lease payments. The drilling and completion

expenditures represented $34 million; followed by oil and gas production with $405 million.

Estimated Impacts in Fisher, 2022Table 1-10

Economic Impacts


Output $331,136,128 $34,267,210 $19,541,409 $384,944,747

Gross County Product $169,648,577 $16,888,716 $11,583,810 $198,121,103

Employment Full-Time 202 259 130 590

Payroll $23,678,839 $6,009,710 $2,102,966 $31,791,515

Estimated State Revenue $17,173,710Source: CCBR Estimations using IMPLAN software version 3, database 2011

Estimated Expenditures Fisher, 2022Table 1-11

Severance Tax $9,988,373.11

Royalties $81,052,314Lease Payments $3,915,811


Oil and gas production $405,261,569Source: CCBR Estimations using IMPLAN software version 3, database 2011


35/191

35

Glasscock County

Overview of Glasscock County

The following graphs and charts show population growth, total employment, the natural resource and

mining employment, and the relationship among Glasscock County, the study area, and the state of

Texas. Glasscock County is named after George Washington Glasscock, an early settler of the Austin

area. Glasscock County is located on US Highway 87, and its only town is Garden City, which has a

population of just 334.

Figure 2-1


http://www.caliper.com/http://www.caliper.com/http://www.caliper.com/


36/191

36


Glasscock County had a total population of just 1,251. The per capita personal income was $32,256. The

top three industry are farm employment, state and local government, and forestry, fishing, and related

activities; with government and government enterprises being the top industry by earnings.

Table 2-1

Glasscock CountyPopulation 1,251

Per capita Personal Income 32,256

Total Employment 436

Farm Employment

Employment by Industry (Top 3) State and Local Government

Forestry, Fishing, and RelatedActivates

Government and GovernmentEnterprises

Earnings by Industry (Top 3)

Forestry, Fishing, and RelatedActivities

MiningSources: Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), Regional Accounts


37/191

37


Glasscock Countys population growth falls behind the state of Texas and the WTxEC study area.

Compared to the 22.2 percent increase of Texas, the study area only increased 2.7 percent during the

last twelve years, while Glasscock County decreased 6.8 percent when comparing 2001 and 2012.

Glasscock Countys population has not been consistent with the region or the state.

Figure 2-2



38/191

38


Employment growth for Glasscock County during the study period is erratic, but has shown a major

upswing since 2009. Glasscock County reached the same 14.7 percent rate as the state of Texas in 2012,

outpacing the WTxEC study areas 11.3 percent job growth when compared to 2001.

Figure 2-3



39/191

39


Employment in the natural resources and mining super-sector increased 51.2 percent in Texas and 74.5

percent for the WTxEC study area between 2001 and 2012. Glasscock Countys employment growth

within the sector has increased to a more modest 22.9 percent between 2001 and 2012.

Figure 2-4



40/191

40



economy. This is determined by calculating the ratio of a particular job sector with total jobs in the local

economy, then comparing that to the same ratio for the state level. A location quotient greater than 1.0

denotes a sector that has greater importance to the local economy than that for the state. A location

quotient less than 1.0 signifies that the sector is lessimportant to the local economy when compared to

the state.

Both Glasscock County and the study area report a location quotient greater than 1.0 from 2001 to

2012. The natural resource and mining super sector has a much greater significance in Glasscock County

than in the state of Texas or even the rest of the study area.


Figure 2-5


41/191

41

Chart 2-6



42/191

42


The following table projects Glasscock Countys population from 2000-2050. The projections are divided

by ethnicity, with a category for Anglo, Black, and Hispanic. Each category contains the percent change.

Glasscock County is projected by the year 2050 to see a 26.8 percent decrease in Anglo population, a

100 percent increase in Black population, and a 51 percent increase in the Hispanic population.

Table 2-2



2000 1,406 - 978 - 7 - 420 - 1 -

2005 1,473 4.8% 1,009 3.2% 7 0.0% 456 8.6% 1 0.0%

2010 1,226 -12.8% 825 -15.6% 15 114.3% 378 10.0% 8 700.0%

2015 1,280 -9.0% 848 -13.3% 15 114.3% 409 -2.6% 8 700.0%

2020 1,341 -4.6% 873 -10.7% 15 114.3% 445 6.0% 8 700.0%

2025 1,391 -1.1% 888 -9.2% 15 114.3% 480 14.3% 8 700.0%2030 1,429 1.6% 885 -9.5% 15 114.3% 521 24.0% 8 700.0%

2035 1,441 2.5% 860 -12.1% 15 114.3% 558 32.9% 8 700.0%

2040 1,421 1.1% 816 -16.6% 15 114.3% 583 38.8% 7 600.0%

2045 1,392 -1.0% 762 -22.1% 14 100.0% 609 45.0% 7 600.0%

2050 1,371 -2.5% 716 -26.8% 14 100.0% 634 51.0% 7 600.0%



43/191

43

Table 2-3

Source: CCBR elaboration with Texas Workforce

Commissions forecasts for Workforce Development

Areas (WDAs) 2010-2020

Total Employment Forecast for Glasscock County in 2014-2022






2014 416

2015 428

2016 440

2017 453

2018 466

2019 4802020 494

2021 508

2022 523


44/191

44


Educational Attainment refers to the highest degree of education an individual has completed. In

Glasscock County, 83.2 percent of its population has at least a high school diploma, and 20 percent havecompleted their bachelors degree.

Table 2-4



Nursery school or preschool 12 3.6% Less than 9th grade 72 9.7%

Kindergarten 12 3.6% 9th-12th grade, no diploma 53 7.1%

Elementary (grades 1-8) 158 47.7% High school diploma or equiv. 173 23.2%

High School (grades 9-12) 113 34.1% Some college, no degree 247 33.1%

College or graduate school 36 10.9% Associate degree 52 7.0%

Total 331 Bachelor's degree 116 15.5%

Graduate or professional degree 33 4.4%Percent with high school diploma 83.2% Total 746

Percent with Bachelor's degree 20.0%Source: Texas Workforce Commissions County Narrative Profile from the Socrates database


45/191

45


Glasscock Countys total sales subject to state sales tax were 5.3 million in the first quarter of 2010 with

an increase to 2.2 million by the first quarter of 2013, an increase of 330 percent. Below is a 10-year

historical graph for Glasscock County of the amount of total sales subject to state sales tax. The original

values are in blue and the smoothed values in red. The smoothed values represent a four-quarter sales

average.


Figure 2-7


46/191

46

County Budgets

The following graph shows the revenues and expenditures for Glasscock County. Their revenues have

steadily risen from under $3.5 million in 2009 to over $7.3 million in 2013, while increasing their net

surplus.

Figure 2-8

Source: Glasscock Reporting Budget Fund


47/191

47

Employment Changes

Between the fourth quarter of 2011 and the fourth quarter of 2012 there was an 8.1 percent change in

employment for all industries. Employment growth for the state of Texas for the same period was 3.26percent. The industry with the highest growth was trade, transportation and utilities with a 9.3 percent

increase, and the industry with the highest negative growth in employment was Construction, with a

15.8 percent decrease.

Table 2-5



ChangePercentChange

Trade, Transport., and Utilities 43 47 4 9.3%Natural Resources and Mining 210 229 19 9.0%Total, All Industries 321 347 26 8.1%

Public Administration 49 50 1 2.0%Construction 19 16 -3 -15.8%Manufacturing n/a n/a n/a n/aInformation n/a n/a n/a n/aFinancial Activities n/a n/a n/a n/aProf., Business, and Other Services n/a 5 n/a n/aEducation and Health Services n/a n/a n/a n/aLeisure and Hospitality n/a n/a n/a n/aOther Services n/a n/a n/a n/a



48/191

48

Commuting Patterns

Using the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamic (LEHD) mapping program, the commuting patterns

of residents and employees of the 10-county region shows where residents work and the employees

live. The commuting patterns for Glasscock County can be seen below. When compared to the other

nine counties, Glasscock County had the third lowest percentage, at 40 percent, of employees who live

within one of the 10-counties with active drilling. However, they had the second highest percentage of

residents who work within the 10-county area.

There are 249 people employed in Glasscock County. Of this total, 150 work in Glasscock County and live

within one of the 10-counties that are part of the study. The remaining 99 workers are employed in

Glasscock County but live outside the 10-county study area.

Table 2-6

Commuting Patterns for Employees

Number Percentage

Live in 10-county area150 60.2%

Live outside 10-county area99 39.8%

Total 249 100.0%Source: US Census Bureaus On the Map

There are 480 workers who live in Glasscock County. Of the total, 118 work in Glasscock and live within

the 10-county study area. The remaining 362 workers are employed in Glasscock County but live outside

the 10-county study area.

Table 2-7


Number Percentage

Work in 10-county area118 24.6%

Work outside 10-county area362 75.4%

Total 480 100.0%Source: US Census Bureaus On the Map


49/191

49


The following table shows the estimated impacts of the shale oil and gas industry on Glasscock County.

In 2012, it is estimated that a total of 1,657 Glasscock County jobs were supported by the 10-county

area under analysis, in addition to $1.4 million in output as well as over $686 million gross county

product.

The total estimated state revenue was $61 million, total severance tax $27 million, an estimated lease

payments of $28 million and $222 million in royalties. The drilling and completion expenditures

represented $276 million; followed by oil and gas production with $1.1 million, and pipeline

construction activity with $9 million.

Estimated Impacts in Glasscock 2012

Table 2-8

Economic Impacts


Output $1,395,709,629 $50,259,020 $22,801,749 $1,468,770,398Gross County Product $656,586,417 $16,835,812 $12,991,805 $686,414,034

Employment Full-Time 1,069 455 133 1,657

Payroll $80,406,832 $11,901,887 $2,040,628 $94,349,346

Estimated State Revenue $61,821,808


Estimated Expenditures in Glasscock 2012Table 2-9

Severance Tax $27,061,044Royalties $222,028,407



Oil and gas production $1,110,142,037

Pipeline Construction $9,310,340Source: CCBR Estimations using IMPLAN software version 3, database 2011


50/191

50


The following table shows the estimated impacts of the oil and gas industry on Glasscock County. In

2022, it is estimated that a total of 1,884 Glasscock County jobs were supported by the 10-county area

under analysis, in addition to $1.9 million in output as well as over $934 million gross county product.

The total estimated state revenue was $81 million, total severance tax $49 million and an estimated

lease payments of $23 million; with an estimate of $405 million in royalties. The drilling and completion

expenditures represented $298 million; while oil and gas production accounted for $2 million and a

refinery production of $3.5 million, and pipeline construction activity with $9 million.

Estimated Impacts in Glasscock 2022Table 2-10

Economic Impacts


Output $1,780,982,912 $56,365,633 $33,862,244 $1,871,210,789

Gross County Product $894,290,370 $20,575,864 $19,401,815 $934,268,048Employment Full-Time 1,172 512 199 1,884

Payroll $133,067,851 $14,726,626 $3,072,251 $150,866,729



Estimated Expenditures Glasscock 2022Table 2-11

Severance Tax $49,533,384.25

Royalties $405,771,731



Oil and gas production $2,028,858,656

Refinery Production $3,555,538,000

Pipeline Construction $9,310,340Source: CCBR Estimations using IMPLAN software version 3, database 2011


51/191

51

Howard County

Overview of Howard County

The following graphs and charts show population growth, total employment, the super sector natural

resource and mining (NRM) employment, and the relationship between Howard County, the study area,and the state of Texas. Howard County is located along Interstate 20 and US Highway 87. The County

was named after Volney E. Howard, a U.S. Congressman from Texas. Big Spring is the countys seat, with

a population 27,282. Other smaller cities include Sand Springs, Coahoma, and Forsan, each with under

1,000 residents.

Figure 3-1


http://www.caliper.com/http://www.caliper.com/http://www.caliper.com/


52/191

52


Howard County had a population of 35,122. The per capita personal income was $37,181. The top three

industry are state and local government, retail trade, and mining; with government and government

enterprises being the top industry by earnings.

Table 3-1

Howard County

Population 35,122

Per capita Personal Income 31,781

Total Employment 12,935

State and Local Government

Employment by Industry (Top 3) Retail Trade

Mining

Government and GovernmentEnterprises

Earnings by Industry (Top 3) Mining

ManufacturingSource: Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), Regional Accounts


53/191

53


The population of Howard County has grown by 6.4 percent during the past twelve years. This

population growth is consistently higher than the 2.7 percent average of the WTxEC study area, but bothpercentages are lower than the 22.2 percent average for the state of Texas.

Figure 3-2



54/191

54


Employment grew in Howard County at a 3.4 percent lower rate than in the state of Texas over the

twelve-year study period. The employment growth percentages for the state of Texas, Howard County,and the WTxEC study area followed a similar pattern.

Figure 3-3



55/191

55


Howard Countys employment in the natural resources and mining sector grew by 76.4 percent over the

twelve-year study period, which is higher than the WTxECs study area growth of 74.5 percent and thestate of Texass 51.2 percent in the same sector between 2001 and 2012. Development within the oil

and gas industry is definitely the driver of growth in Howard County, as the growth in jobs in the sector

outpaces total job growth.Figure 3-4



56/191

56

Figure 3-5



economy. This is determined by calculating the ratio of a particular job sector from the local economy

with total jobs in the local economy, then comparing that to the same ratio for the state. A location

quotient greater than 1.0 denotes a sector that has greater importance to the local economy than that

for the state. A location quotient less than 1.0 signifies that the sector is lessimportant to the local

economy when compared to the state.



57/191

57

Both Howard County and the study area report a location quotient greater than 1.0 between 2001 and

2012. The natural resource and mining super sector has a greater significance in the study area than in

Howard County, and its importance has grown over the years.

Figure 3-6



58/191

58

Population ProjectionsPopulation projections are an estimate of a future population. The following table projects Howard

Countys population from 2000-2050. The projections are divided by ethnicity, with a category for Anglo,

Black, and Hispanic. Each category contains the percent change. Howard County is projected by the year

2050 to see an increase in total population by 17.4 percent, a 12.5 percent decrease in Anglopopulation, a 42.9 percent increase in Black population, and a 54.4 percent increase in the Hispanic

population.

Table 3-2



2000 33,627 - 19,327 - 1357 - 12597 - 346 -

2005 34,365 2.2% 18,922 -2.1% 1456 7.3% 13622 8.1% 365 5.5%

2010 35,012 4.1% 18,801 -2.7% 2079 53.2% 13255 5.2% 877 153.5%

2015 36,274 7.9% 18,946 -2.0% 2193 61.6% 14,197 12.7% 938 171.1%

2020 37,310 11.0% 18,937 -2.0% 2288 68.6% 15,095 19.8% 990 186.1%

2025 38,237 13.7% 18,838 -2.5% 2328 71.6% 16,024 27.2% 1047 202.6%2030 38,936 15.8% 18,573 -3.9% 2326 71.4% 16,941 34.5% 1096 216.8%

2035 39,395 17.2% 18,240 -5.6% 2281 68.1% 17,733 40.8% 1141 229.8%

2040 39,603 17.8% 17,843 -7.7% 2193 61.6% 18,392 46.0% 1175 239.6%

2045 39,563 17.7% 17,366 -10.1% 2078 53.1% 18,941 50.4% 1178 240.5%

2050 39,475 17.4% 16,902 -12.5% 1939 42.9% 19,454 54.4% 1180 241.0%



59/191

59

Table

Table 3-3

Total Employment Forecast for Howard County in 2014-2022






2014 13265

2015 13582

2016 13909

2017 14242

2018 14586

2019 14937

2020 15296

2021 15572

2022 15898Source: CCBR elaboration with Texas Workforce

Commissions forecasts for Workforce Development Areas

(WDAs) 2010-2020


60/191

60

Building Permits

Howard County saw a large increase in single family building permits the last three years, rising from two

in 2009, to fifteen in 2012.

Table 3-4

Single Family Building PermitsYear 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Units 15 3 0 3 0 2 2 16 10 2 2 5 15Source: Texas A&M Real Estate Center


61/191

61


Educational Attainment refers to the highest degree of education an individual has completed. In

Howard County, 72.2 percent of its population has at least a high school diploma, and only 10.8 percenthave completed their bachelors degree.

Table 3-5



Nursery school or preschool 384 4.9% Less than 9th grade 2,698 11.4%

Kindergarten 385 4.9% 9th-12th grade, no diploma 3,881 16.4%

Elementary (grades 1-8) 3,390 43.1% High school diploma or equiv. 6,721 28.4%

High School (grades 9-12) 2,127 27.0% Some college, no degree 5,963 25.2%

College or graduate school 1,579 20.1% Associate degree 1,846 7.8%

Total 7,865 Bachelor's degree 1,727 7.3%

Graduate or professional degree 828 3.5%

Percent with high school diploma 72.2% Total 23,664

Percent with Bachelor's degree 10.8%Source: Texas Workforce Commissions County Narrative Profile from the Socrates database


62/191

62


Howard Countys total sales subject to sales tax were $64,744,093 in the first quarter of 2010 with an

increase to $110,074,460 by the first quarter of 2013, an increase of 70 percent. Below is a 10 year

historical graph for Howard County of the amount of total sales subject to sales tax. The original values

are in blue and the smoothed values in red. The smoothed values represent a four-quarter salesaverage.

Figure 3-7



63/191

63

County Budgets

The following graph shows the revenues and expenditures for Howard County. Their revenues have held

steady around $11 million, until they increased 2011.

Figure 3-8

Source: Howard County, Texas 2009-2013 Budgets


64/191

64

Employment Changes

Between the fourth quarter of 2011 and the fourth quarter of 2012, for Howard County, there was a 3.1

percent change in employment for all industries. The employment growth for the state of Texas for the

same period was 3.26 percent. The industry with the highest growth was manufacturing with a 15.7

percent increase.

Table 3-6



ChangePercentChange

Manufacturing 959 1,110 151 15.7%Prof., Business, and Other Services 284 321 37 13.0%Leisure and Hospitality 1,107 1,206 99 9.9%Total, All Industries 12,392 12,780 388 3.1%Construction 841 863 22 2.6%Education and Health Services 4,596 4,716 120 2.6%

Public Administration 643 626 -17 2.6%Trade, Transport, and Utilities 2,167 220 42 1.9%Natural Resources and Mining 946 950 4 0.4%Other Services 317 315 -2 -0.6%Information 98 94 -4 -4.0%Financial Activities 434 370 -64 -14.7%



65/191

65

Commuting Patterns

Using LEHD mapping, the commuting patterns of residents and employees of the 10-county region

shows where residents work and the employees live. The commuting patterns for Howard County can

be seen below. When compared to the other nine counties, Howard County had the third highest

percentage, at 32 percent, of employees who live within one of the 10-counties with active drilling. They

also had the third highest percentage of residents who work within the 10-county area.

There are 10,683 people employed in Howard County. A total of 7,265 work in Howard and live within

one of the 10-counties that are part of the study. The remaining 3,418 workers are employed in Howard

County but live outside the 10-county study area.

Table 3-7

Commuting Patterns for Employees

Number Percentage

Live in 10-county area7,265 68%

Live outside 10-county area3,418 32%

Total 10,683 100%Source: U.S. Census Bureaus On the Map

There are 12,418 workers who live in Howard County. A total 7,402 work in Howard and live within the

10-county study area. The remaining 5,016 workers are employed in Howard County but live outside the

10-county study area.

Table 3-8


Number Percentage

Work in 10-county area7,402 60%

Work outside 10-county area5,016 40%

Total 12,418 100%Source: U.S. Census Bureaus On the Map


66/191

66


The following table shows the estimated impacts of the shale activity on Howard County. In 2012, it is

estimated that a total of 2,808 Howard County jobs were supported by the 10-county area under

analysis, in addition to $4.2 million in output and more than $1.5 million in gross county product.

The total estimated state revenue was $54 million, total severance tax $17 million, a total of $148

million in royalties and an estimated lease payments of $15 million. The drilling and completion

expenditures represented $138 million; followed by oil and gas production with $744 million, and

pipeline construction activity with $9 million.

Estimated Impacts in Howard 2012

Table 3-9

Economic Impacts


Output $3,543,275,901 $598,510,145 $97,197,229 $4,238,983,274

Gross County Product $912,082,419 $185,886,274 $56,128,805 $1,154,097,498

Employment Full-Time 827 1,350 631 2,808

Payroll $88,277,830 $55,237,978 $20,380,558 $163,896,367



Estimated Expenditures in Howard 2012Table 3-10

Severance Tax $17,722,708Royalties $148,950,866



Oil and gas production $744,754,328

Refinery Production $2,660,521,500Source: CCBR Estimations using IMPLAN software version 3, database 2011


67/191

67


The following table shows the estimated impacts of the shale activity on Howard County. In 2022, it is

estimated that a total of 2,783 Howard County jobs were supported by the 10-county area under

analysis, in addition to $4.5 million in output and more than $1.2 million in gross county product.

The total estimated state revenue was $52 million, total severance tax $22 million, a total of $186

million on royalties and an estimated lease payments of $9 million. The drilling and completion

expenditures represented $80 million; followed by oil and gas production with $932 million.

Estimated Impacts in Howard 2022Table 3-11

EconomicImpacts


Output $3,672,311,610 $681,214,954 $107,534,671 $4,461,061,235

Gross County Product $925,823,833 $204,736,419 $61,327,884 $1,191,888,136

Employment Full-Time 720 1,377 686 2,783

Payroll $100,642,574 $57,774,039 $22,201,279 $180,617,893



Estimated Expenditures in Howard 2022Table 3-12

Severance Tax $22,973,258.14Royalties $186,420,322



Oil and gas production $932,101,609Source: CCBR Estimations using IMPLAN software version 3, database 2011


68/191

68

Irion County

Overview of Irion County

The following graphs and charts show population growth, total employment, natural resource andmining employment, and the relationship between Irion County, the study area, and the state of Texas.

Irion County is located on theEdwards Plateau in thestate ofTexas.It is part of the San Angelo

Metropolitan Statistical Area.The county is named forRobert Anderson Irion,a secretary of state of the

west texas region 10 county level impacts of oil and gas phase 2

Documents