BULLETIN 507 OCTOBER 1978 '9'q . LLABAMAl~r L!1_AA7G ! trends dnd implications AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION/AUBURN UNIVERSITY R. DENNIS ROUSE, Director AUBURN, ALABAMA CONTENTS page INTRODUCTION............... OBJECTIVES ............... .................... ...................... 3 5 METHOD ............... FINDINGS ... ............................ ......................... 5 .............. 6 Net Migration in the United States .................. Net Migration in Alabama ............................. 9 ............. 9 Alabama Total. ............... ............. 9 M etropolitan Areas..... ............. Net Migration in Metropolitan Age Groups ........... 11 Net Migration in Non-Metropolitan Age Groups ..... 14 Place of Residence in 1965 ........................... 17 Determinants of Migration ..................... 19 Employment in Agriculture....................... 19 ............. 20 Income Level ........................... Industrial Employment .............................. 22 Trends in Migration 1970-1975 ........................ 24 Urban Versus Rural Migration ...................... 24 Net Migration in Alabama 1970-1975 .............. 25 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ............................. .................... LITERATURE CITED .............. First Printing 3M, November 1978 28 30 Information contained herein is available to all without regard to race, color, or national origin. Population Migration in Alabama 1960-1975 Trends and Implications *JOSEPH J. MOLNAR and CALVIN VANLANDINGHAM INTRODUCTION M IGRATION is a major source of population change in a given geographical area. Migration is one of three demographic processes that directly influences the growth and decline of a population. The other two are fertility and mortality. Fertility refers to the birth rate, mortality to the death rate, and net migration to the difference between the number entering and the number leaving an area. Although migration is not a major contributor to the nation's total population growth today, internal migration is a major factor in population change for regions, subregions, states, and counties. Because natural increase in population the excess of births over deaths has shown little geographic or regional variation, migration remains the major source of population change. Migration rates often reflect changing economic conditions and opportunity structures that influence individuals to leave an area for more attractive or useful destinations. Migration rates also reflect the relative decline or growth of an area and have important implications for those who remain and those who are new residents. Areas experiencing net out-migration often are viewed as declining because they are losing the most productive segments (young adults) of the population. These losses further reduce economic activity and erode the tax base for public services, making the area less attractive for the remaining population. *Assistant professors, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology. 4 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Certain personal and social characteristics have been associated with differences in the propensity to migrate. These factors include the age, sex, and race of migrants. Factors which discriminate between migrants and non-migrants are referred to as selectivity in migration. A major factor is selectivity by age. Particularly true of migrants from rural to urban areas, the peak age to migrate occurs between the ages of 18 to 25. For these individuals migration is likely to occur as a response to new or declining employment opportunities. Migration is generally more common among older adolescents and young adults than any other age groups. However, a high migration of older persons also occurs. Beale and Fugitt found, exclusive of urban sprawl, nonmetropolitan population growth was most highly associated with counties termed as "retirement" counties (3). These individuals typically move: 1. to retirement areas in the South and Southwest; and 2. from farms and rural areas to nearby small towns and villages and occasionally to large cities (2). A second factor contributing to selectivity in migration is sex. Males are more likely to respond to changes in agriculture or manufacturing employment opportunities, whereas women tend to leave rural areas for white collar and clerical jobs in urban areas. A disproportionately large number of males in rural areas is often the result. In addition, males tend to predominate in long distance moves, whereas females tend to outnumber males in short distance migration, such as a move from the countryside to a nearby town or small city. A third factor influencing migration is race. Because race is often correlated with differences in educational and occupational experiences, corresponding differences in white and nonwhite net migration rates occur. Changes in the structure of agriculture have displaced nonwhite farm employment at a faster rate than white, accelerating rural to urban migration rates, particularly in the South. The racial climate of the 1960's also may have contributed to differences in regional migration rates for nonwhites. As educational levels and occupational opportunities equalize, differences in migration rates may decline. Migration rates also may primarily reflect differences by income group, employment in agriculture, and employment in manufacturing. In Alabama, a major 'push' factor may be low incomes and a lack of job opportunities. Mechanization and farm consolidation have reduced the agricultural labor force, ALABAMA POPULATION MIGRATION 5 particularly the low income and low education segments. Correspondingly, manufacturing activity has grown rapidly, particularly in urban areas, exerting a 'pull' factor on rural areas. OBJECTIVES The general objective of this report is to examine net migration rates in Alabama in the context of national, regional, and subregional developments. Specifically, the objectives are as follows: 1. To examine 1960-1970 net migration rates in Alabama and their relation to national trends for metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas by age, sex, and race. 2. To compare net migration rates for individual Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas in Alabama with state and national trends. 3. To examine the influence of employment in agriculture, family income, and employment in manufacturing on net migration rates in the South and on recent migration changes in Alabama. 4. To examine the 1965 residences of Alabama's 1970 population. 5. To compare 1960-70 and 1970-1975 net migration rates for Alabama counties to identify net migration trend reversals as well as areas of continuing decline. The study is intended to identify major trends in the growth and dispersion of Alabama's population during the past decade. This period is one in which Alabama has become identified as a Sunbelt State and has undergone major changes in level of income, declines in the agricultural employment, and major advances in industrialization. Migration patterns reflect important changes in the social and economic structure of the area. Understanding the nature of shifts in the distribution of the residential population may contribute to the ability of planners and decision-makers to constructively react to new developments in Alabama's future. METHOD The data for this study were obtained from three principal sources: USDA population-migration reports, Census Bureau Reports, and statistical summaries prepared by the Alabama Development Office (1). Of particular importance is the U.S. 6 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION population-migration report entitled Net Migration of the Population, 1960-1970, by Age, Sex, and Color by Bowles and Lee, from which the rest of this section is summarized (4). The net migration estimates presented in the Bowles and Lee study represent the balance between the numbers of persons migrating into and out of specified areas or analytical groupings of counties. They show the net gain or loss of population due to internal migration and also reflect net movements of population between the United States and other countries. Net migration into the United States totaled about 3.2 million persons in the 1960-1970 period. This roughly reflects the difference between out-migration counties that had a loss of 8.5 million persons and in-migration counties that had a net gain of about 11.8 million persons through migration. Migration estimates were computed by the census survival ratios estimate method of preliminary county net migration estimates for age-sex-color groups. Using the vital statistics method, county net migration estimates were computed for white and nonwhite individuals. The preliminary census survival ratios were then adjusted to vital statistics estimates by color. Bowles and Lee detail these procedures in their base report (4). Migration rates of age-sex-color groups and for the total population of counties are net migration estimates. The estimated rates are expressed as percentages of the 1970 expected survivors of the 1960 population and births during the decade. Estimates for states and other areas were developed by summation of inclusive county figures. Rates were calculated by relating these estimates to similarly summed expected survivors. FINDINGS Data are presented in seven major sections. The first two sections compare national and state trends in net migration. The next two detail net migration patterns in metropolitan and nonmetropolitan Alabama by age category. The fifth deals with the place of residence in 1965 of Alabama's 1970 population. The sixth examines agriculture, income, and manufacturing as factors contributing to net migration in the southern region. Finally, the last section reviews recent estimates of net migration trends in Alabama counties. NET MIGRATION IN THE UNITED STATES This section summarizes national, regional, and state trends in ALABAMA POPULATION MIGRATION 7 migration. Population processes in Alabama reflect, in part, the national context. They also reflect, however, the unique circumstances that characterize the Southeast and the internal conditions of the State. A central concern is to place net migration in Alabama in the context of the national trend. Table 1 shows 1960-1970 net migration rates for the metropolitan and non-metropolitan subdivisions using four levels of aggregation ranging from the United States, to the South, to East South Central (Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee), to Alabama. Minus signs preceding estimates denote net out-migration. Total U.S. population net migration rates are all positive, indicating that more individuals entered the country than left it. Metropolitan areas of the nation grew during the period, particularly in terms of the nonwhite population. Women tended to have higher rates of migration than men among both whites and nonwhites. Urban areas have more white collar and clerical jobs available for women, whereas rural areas offer jobs in more traditional male occupations involving farming and physical labor. A pattern similar to the national trend of rural-urban migration is observable in the Southern region. Nonwhites, however, were mainly out-migrants from the region, except in urban areas. Southern metropolitan counties gained migrants in all categories, but net migration was much higher for whites than blacks in Southern metropolitan areas. Non-metropolitan rates were negative overall, slightly positive for whites, and very negative for nonwhites. The East South Central portion of the Southern region further specifies these trends, with some major exceptions. In contrast to the total South, net out-migration occurred for all categories, in all groups, with the exception of metropolitan whites. Blacks left the area in great numbers. These figures may reflect the general economic distress of these states during the period and the racial situation that encouraged many residents to seek opportunities in non-southern urban areas. Out-migrants tend to possess skills, experiences, and orientations that motivate them to seek fulfillment of their potentials in other places. Those left behind are often less skilled, less qualified, or otherwise less able to seek alternatives. Certainly a large number of these individuals are productively involved in their home counties, but because those that leave tend Go MIGRATION RATES 1960-1970 IN U.S., THE SOUTHERN TABLE 1. METROPOLITAN AND NON-METROPOLITAN EAST SOUTH CENTRAL REGION, AND ALABAMA NET REGION, Male 1.0 9.6 -16.1 __ _ Area United States ......... Metropolitan ........ Non-Metropolitan Total 1.6 3.8 -2.5 Total Male 1.2 3.3 -2.6 Net migration rate (Percent of 1970 adjusted expected survivors) Nnht __ White __ - __ Nnht Female 1.9 4.2 -2.5 Total 1.6 2.8 - .7 Male 1.3 2.4 - .9 Female 1.9 3.1 .5 Total 1.6 10.6 -16.4 Female 2.2 11.5 -16.7 South................. Metropolitan ........ Non-Metropolitan .... East South Central°° ... Metropolitan.... Non-Metropolitan .. Alabama................ Metropolitan .... Non-Metropolitan . . 1.2 6.3 -4.0 -5.2 -1.6 -7.4 -6.3 -5.8 -6.7 .9 5.8 -3.9 -5.4 -2.1 -7.4 -6.5 -6.6 -6.5 1.5 6.8 -4.0 -4.9 -1.0 -7.4 -6.0 -5.1 -6.8 4.1 7.7 .5 -1.2 .8 -2.5 .1 -1.0 .8 - 3.8 7.2 .4 -1.5 .3 -2.6 .4 -1.9 .9 - 4.5 8.2 .6 -1.0 1.3 -2.4 - -9.3 1.1 -18.9 -18.0 -8.9 -24.0 -20.0 -16.0 -24.2 -9.7 .3 -18.8 -18.5 -9.8 -24.1 -20.7 -16.9 -24.7 -9.0 1.7 -19.0 -17.5 -8.1 -23.9 -19.4 -15.3 -23.9 DF C 7- sissippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas. °Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee. Source: Gladys K. Bowles and Everett S. Lee. Net Migration the Population, 1960-1970, by Age, Sex, and Color, Population Migration Report 1960-1970, Part 7. (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Printing Department), July 1977. Tables 3 & 4. *Delaware, .2 .2 .6 C, F C Maryland, District of Columbia, Virginia, W. Virginia, N. Carolina, S. Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mis- of m x -o -I m, -I D O ALABAMA POPULATION MIGRATION 9 to be young adults, the very young and the elderly tend to be disproportionately represented in the remaining population. Alabama generally reflects regional and subregional trends for metropolitan areas. Though an overall net out-migration occurred during this period, there was a slight net in-migration of whites to rural areas of the State. Many urban whites may have sought rural and small town living, particularly in adjacent non-metropolitan counties that enabled commuting to urban jobs. Alabama's cities lost population, contrary to national, regional, and subregional trends. Though Alabama's cities and the subregion had a net out-migration of population, the losses also occurred for whites, a trend not found in the total Southern region. The next section further identifies this trend by examining individual metropolitan areas in Alabama. NET MIGRATION IN ALABAMA This section considers net migration rates in the State as a whole, in metropolitan areas, and in non-metropolitan areas, comparing the age structure of migration in both subsets of counties. Alabama Total Table 2 shows that nearly 230,000 individuals were lost to Alabama's population through migration during the 1960-1970 period. The highest rates of net out-migration occurred in the 20-29 age group. Individuals 60 and over tended to migrate into the State. Whites tended to leave the State only in the 29-and-under age group; rates for those 30 and over tended to be consistently positive. The number of young people leaving, however, was so great that the overall net migration for whites was negative. Blacks tended to leave the State in almost all age groups. Particularly notable is the loss of individuals in the 25-29 age bracket, in which more than 50 percent left the State. Across age groups the loss through migration was 20 percent of the black population at rates slightly higher for males than for females. Metropolitan Areas A Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau as: "a group of contiguous counties which contains at least one city of 50,000 inhabitants or more, or "twin 0 TABLE 2. NET MIGRATION RATES 1960-1970 FOR ALABAMA BY SEX AND RACE Total Age 0-4................. 5-9................. 10-14............... 15-19............... 20-24 ............... 25-29............... 30-34............... 35-39 ............... 40-44 ............... 45-49 ............... 50-54 ............... 55-59 ............... 60-64 ............... 65-69 ............... 70-74 ............... 75 and over.......... All ages .............. Number................ Total -2.4 -5.1 -5.6 -7.9 -20.4 -20.6 -7.8 -3.2 -1.6 -1.8 -1.9 -1.3 .9 4.5 3.8 Male -2.4 -5.0 -5.3 -8.6 -23.4 -21.1 -6.7 -2.4 -.3 -.9 -1.2 -1.5 .8 4.5 5.0 -.6 -6.5 -116,315 Net migration rate (Percent of 1970 adjusted expected survivors) White Nonwhite Female -.6 .6 1.7 -.2 -5.1 -5.1 1.7 1.9 .4 .3 .2 1.5 3.4 5.6 4.5 2.5 .2 3, 202 Total -6.0 -15.3 -17.8 -20.2 -43.9 -51.4 -34.1 -20.0 -12.0 -9.9 -9.4 -6.9 -4.0 2.1 .3 -6.2 -20.0 -227,648 Male -6.1 -15.3 -17.5 -21.5 -47.2 -53.4 -35.9 -20.9 -12.3 -8.4 -8.2 -5.3 -1.9 2.6 3.0 -6.0 -20.7 -11, 080 Female -5.9 -15.3 -18.1 -18.9 -40.9 -49.6 -32.7 -19.2 -11.9 -11.0 -10.3 -8.3 -5.6 1.8 -1.6 -9.7 -19.4 -116,568 m Female -2.4 -5.2 -5.9 -7.2 -17.3 -20.1 -8.7 -3.9 -2.8 -2.5 -2.5 -1.1 1.0 4.5 2.9 -.8 -6.0 -113,366 Total -.6 .6 1.7 -.8 -8.5 -5.7 3.0 2.6 1.7 Male -.6 .7 1.8 -1.4 -11.9 -6.2 4.4 3.3 3.0 1.1 .8 -.4 1.7 5.3 5.8 1.5 -.4 -5,235 .7 -.7 -6.3 -229,681 .5 .6 2.6 5.5 5.0 2.1 -.1 -2,033 C m x z m OI ALABAMA POPULATION MIGRATION ALABAMA P OPULATIO N M IG RATION 11 1 cities" with a combined population of at least 50,000. In addition to the county or counties containing such a city or cities, contiguous counties are included in an SMSA if, according to certain criteria, they are essentially metropolitan in character and are socially and economically integrated with the central city (6)." In Alabama, nine SMSA's encompass 18 of the State's 67 counties, figure 1 (Russell County is part of the Columbus, Ga. SMSA). Table 3 shows 1960-1970 net migration rates for the eight present SMSA areas in Alabama. With the exception of Huntsville, all SMSA areas experienced a net out-migration during this period, as did the overall metropolitan areas of Alabama. Positive net migration rates for Huntsville reflect the expansion of the NASA Space Center and its support activities during this period. The growth of this facility induced a change in the occupational structure of the area in the form of greater numbers of professional, technical, and kindred workers. These individuals are traditionally more mobile than persons in other occupations and many came from other regions in the country to become involved in the space project. White net out-migration rates were consistently lower than nonwhite rates in the SMSA's. Tuscealoosa exhibited slight positive white net in-migration, associated with growth of the University of Alabama, which is located there, whereas white net in-migration occurring in Huntsville was very great. Net migration for whites also was positive in Montgomery, attributable in part to the growth of State government. The remaining SMSA areas all lost white population. The nonwhite population out-migrated in each metropolitan area. The rate was lowest, however, in Huntsville, where job opportunities were increasing, and was greatest in Gadsden and Montgomery. Males tended to leave the metropolitan areas at higher rates than females, for both whites and nonwhites. Males maybe more likely to respond to declining employment conditions and to seek opportunities in other areas. NET MIGRATION IN METROPOLITAN AGE GROUPS Table 4 shows the distribution of migration rates across age categories in metropolitan Alabama. The data are consistent with earlier discussion, showing that the highest net out-migration was 12 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION FIGURE 1. STANDARD METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREAS I- 0 -v C TABLE 3. NET MIGRATION RATES 1960-1970 FOR ALABAMA STIANDARD METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREAS BY SEX AND RACE SMSA Total -5.3 -6.5 -3.8 11.3 19.9 -10.3 Net migration rate (Percent of 1970 adjusted expected survivors) Nonwhite White Total Male Total Female Male Total Female Male -5.4 -7.3 -4.8 -11.9 19.4 -11.0 -9.2 -5.5 -6.6 rrrur~ -4.8 -5.8 -3.0 -10.8 20.5 -9.6 -6.3 -5.5 -5.1 r vlssul~ -2.8 -2.4 -1.6 -9.0 25.0 -7.9 .5 1.9 -1.0 rvrur -2.9 -3.3 -2.6 -9.5 24.1 -8.6 -1.7 2.1 -1.9 rrrur~ -2.6 -1.6 -.6 -8.6 25.8 -7.2 2.7 1.7 -.2 -16.7 -15.1 -16.1 -23.3 -1.3 -15.4 -20.3 -22.9 -16.0 z Female -13.3 -14.4 -15.3 -21.9 -.9 -14.5 -19.5 -21.6 -15.3 D Anniston ............ Birmingham ......... Florence ............ Gadsden ............ Huntsville ........... Mobile.............. Montgomery .......... Tuscaloosa .......... Alabama Metro .... 3!Y1 3~n -18.2 -15.9 -17.1 -25.0 -1.9 -16.3 -21.2 -24.3 -16.9 z -7.7 -5.5 -5.8 LVLQl =a~ 14 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION found among late adolescents and young adults for both whites and nonwhites. Migration rates were consistently negative for nonwhites under the age of 65 and were extremely heavy for the younger segments of the black labor force, exceeding 25 percent for those 20 to 45 years of age. Some in-migration is to be noted for whites 25 to 34, which may reflect industrialization and a corresponding increase in job opportunities in urban areas. In addition, many space scientists and technical personnel were in this age and racial group, as well as individuals joining several of Alabama's rapidly growing universities. During this period, Alabama's population became older as young people left and older, retirement-age individuals returned. NET MIGRATION IN NON-METROPOLITAN AGE GROUPS Table 5 shows net migration rates for non-metropolitan counties by age. Heavy net out-migration occurred for nonwhites of almost all age groups. The heaviest net out-migration occurred among those aged 20-29, consistent with the earlier discussion of age as a selectivity factor in migration. Rates were extremely high for nonwhites, 5 to 6 times those of whites. Net in-migration occurred for whites age 5 to 19 and for nearly all whites 30 and over. Out-migration occurred in the 29-49 age group and for those 0-4, the children of out-migrants in their early family formation years. Whites moving to rural areas during this period tended to be either middle-aged (35-49) with children, or of retirement age (60-75). They may largely consist of individuals employed in urban areas seeking small town and rural environments for their families. They also may represent whites taking jobs displaced by the massive out-migration of rural blacks. For whatever reason, rural areas in Alabama experienced moderately high in-migration of whites during a period when national and East South Central area trends showed a heavy out-migration of residents of all age groups. To some extent, the Alabama situation may have anticipated the population turn-around of the 1970's, when many rural areas reversed their traditional decline and began to experience population growth and increased popularity as a place to live. In Alabama, this trend began in the 1960's. Net migration rates for non-metropolitan counties showed a more varied pattern than was observed in the metropolitan counties. The major difference was in the white population, w TABLE 4. NET MIGRATION RATES 1960-1970 FOR METROPOLITAN ALABAMA COUNTIES BY AGE, SEX, AND RACE 0 -o C Total Age 0-4................... 5-9................... 10-14.................. 15-19.................. 20-24.................. 25-29 .................. 30-34.................. 35-39.................. 40-44.................. 45-49.................... 50-54.................... 55-59.................... 60-64.................... 65-69.................... 70-74.................... 75 and over...... All ages.................. Number................ Total -2.0 -5.2 -6.5 -8.5 -17.6 -11.3 -6.2 -5.5 -3.3 -3.6 -3.0 -2.4 -.9 1.5 1.9 2.1 -5.8 -105,620 Male -2.1 -5.2 -6.4 -9.8 -23.8 -11.8 -2.7 -5.1 -2.5 -3.4 -2.6 -2.8 -1.9 0 Net migration rate (Percent of 1970 adjusted expected survivors) White Nonwhite Female -2.0 -5.3 -6.6 -7.2 -11.3 -10.8 -9.1 -5.9 -4.0 -3.9 -3.4 -2.1 0 Total -.4 -.5 -1.7 -4.7 -8.1 4.7 3.6 -1.2 -1.2 -2.0 -1.1 -1.1 -.1 2.2 2.6 4.3 -1.0 -12,290 Male -.4 -.5 -1.8 -5.8 -15.2 4.6 8.2 -.9 -.5 -2.2 -1.1 -2.3 -2.1 -.1 .2 1.8 -1.9 -11,246 Female -.4 -.5 -1.6 -3.5 -.9 4.9 -.4 -1.4 -1.8 -1.8 -1.0 0 Total -5.2 -13.4 -14.3 -15.1 -35.6 -42.7 -28.9 -17.2 -9.3 -8.6 -8.3 -5.7 -2.8 -.2 .2 -3.3 -16.0 -93,330 Male -5.3 -13.5 -14.1 -16.8 -40.9 -45.6 -30.1 -17.8 -9.3 -7.3 -7.0 -4.2 -1.4 .2 1.2 -.4 -16.9 -46,113 Female 5.1 -13.4 -14.5 -13.4 -30.6 -40.1 -28.0 16.8 -9.4 -9.5 -9.4 -7.0 -3.9 -.5 -.5 -5.2 -15.3 -47,217 0 .5 1.2 -6.6 -57,359 2.6 2.9 2.7 -5.1 -48,261 1.6 4.1 4.3 5.8 -.2 -1,044 *insufficient numbers for estimate. tit 1 TABLE 5. NET MIGRATION RATES 1960-70 FOR NON-METROPOLITAN ALABAMA COUNTIES BY AGE, SEX, AND RACE Age 0-4................ 5-9................ 10-14............... 15-19............... 20-24............... Total if Total Male -2.7 Net migration rate (Percent of 1970 adjusted expected survivors) White Nonwhite Female Total Male Female Total Male -2.7 Female -2.7 -5.0 -4.7 -7.3 -22.8 -28.3 -9.4 -.6 .3 .4 -4.8 -4.3 -5.1 -5.1 -.8 -.8 1.7 5.2 1.8 5.4 -.8 -6.8 1.6 5.0 -6.9 -17.3 -21.5 -17.3 -21.1 -7.5 -23.0 -28.5 -10.4 .6 -7.1 -22.7 -28.1 -8.4 -1.7 -1.4 -1.0 -1.6 -.1 2.9 -8.9 -14.0 2.4 6.6 2.9 -9.1 -14.6 1.0 7.9 6.9 3.0 -25.2 -26.1 -52.9 -60.1 -41.8 -24.8 -16.1 -9.9 -6.7 -17.3 -21.8 -24.4 -50.5 -58.1 D- 25-29............. 30-34............... 35-39............... 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... -8.7 -13.4 3.8 5.4 -51.7 -59.0 -39.9 -23.4 -15.6 r -38.2 -22.4 -15.2 -13.0 -11.5 2.3 1.9 -.3 70-74.............. 75 and over.......... All ages .............. Number............. -.7 -.2 2.6 7.4 -2.9 5.5 .2 4.8 3.7 2.0 2.9 2.6 1.4 3.3 8.9 9.1 -1.9 16.5 2.0 6.2 2.2 4.9 4.8 2.7 1.4 4.9 10.0 10.4 1.3 2.9 5.0 6.9 -11.7 -10.7 -8.3 -5.3 -9.7 -6.5 2.9 -3.6 -6.8 8.3 7.1 .4 4.7 -.1 .6 4,246 4.8 -12.3 .5 -2.6 5.4 5.0 -10.5 -9.8 -7.4 4.4 C I- -2.8 -13.6 -23.9 -69,351 C m -v -6.7 .8 10,257 .9 6,011 -24.2 -134,318 -24.7 -64.967 -124,061 -58,956 -65,105 X z ALABAMA POPULATION MIGRATION 17 which demonstrated a small net return to rural areas. Though the overall rate is small, largely because the 20-29 age group left in great numbers, 13 of the 16 age categories actually showed net inmigration of whites. For nonwhites, the net migration rate was a rather large -24.2, but some in-migration was observed for those 65-74 years of age. PLACE OF RESIDENCE IN 1965 An important concern of migration analysis is the origin of migrants to an area. This section examines the 1965 origins of 1970 Alabama residents and the numbers of individuals coming from other regions of the country. The 1970 Census asked a 15 percent sample of Alabama residents "What was your place of residence 5 years ago?" Table 6 presents summary estimates of the number of individuals residing in different places in 1965 by race and ruralurban residence in 1970. These data break the migration stream in Alabama into its components of origin. The table shows the number of individuals living in houses, counties, and states in 1970 different from their 1965 locations, as well as the percent living in the same house, county, and state in 1965 and 1970. All percentages are expressed in terms of the previous adjacent total. Of the more than 3.1 million people living in Alabama in 1970, more than half resided in the same house, whereas nearly 1.3 million had changed residence during this time. Of those changing residence, 65 percent remained in the same county. Of the 440,000 Alabamians residing in different counties in 1965, 47 percent remained in Alabama and the rest lived in another state. Approximately 64 percent of 1965 out-of-state residents who moved to Alabama were from the Southern region and about 18 percent from the North Central region. Thus, about 40 percent of Alabama's 1970 residents lived in different houses in 1965, but only 16 percent of those previous residences were out-of-state. Black, white, and Hispanic comparisons show that a higher proportion of blacks lived in the same house than whites, but a much lower proportion of Hispanics were residentially stable. The vast majority of blacks living in another house in 1970 resided in the same county in 1965, but only 15.5 percent of the differentcounty Hispanics were 1965 state residents. In urban areas, a slightly lower proportion of individuals resided in the same house between 1965 and 1970. The majority of urban residents moving to a different county were previous out-of-state residents, and the vast majority of the out-of-state Co TABLE 6. RESIDENCE IN 1965 FOR TOTAL POPULATION FIVE YEARS OLD AND OVER BY RACE AND URBAN/RURAL RESIDENCE: 1970 ALABAMA Alabama resident in 1970 Total population age 5+ 1970 A Same house as 1965 Percent of A 54.5 52.6 60.0 29.7 51.0 48.7 56.9 59.4 57.7 64.9 B Total 1,266,822 985,180 279,540 6,350 790,041 604,645 185,396 476,781 380,535 96,246 Same county as 1965 Percent of B 65.2 59.9 84.3 44.0 63.7 57.3 84.4 67.8 63.9 83.1 Different house in United States Different count C Total 440,544 395,418 43,934 3,558 286,966 258,142 28,824 153,578 137,276 16,302 Percent of C 47.3 46.1 58.8 15.2 42.9 41.9 51.7 55.6 54.0 68.3 Total 232,068 212,961 18,106 3,019 163,808 149,883 13,925 68,260 63,078 5,182 n Different state North North CenSouth east% tral % % 7.6 7.0 14.9 8.4 8.6 8.1 13.9 5.4 4.4 16.7 18.3 17.6 26.5 11.3 17.0 16.2 25.8 21.2 20.9 25.5 64.2 65.3 51.4 57.0 64.0 65.2 51.0 64.5 65.6 50.9 West % Alabama TOTAL ................... WHITE ................... BLACK ................... HISPANIC ................ Urban TOTAL ................... WHITE .................... NONWHITE*. ............ Rural 3,145,184 2,330,389 809,830 11,745 1,844,192 1,332,935 511,257 .1,300,992 997,454 303,538 9.9 10.0 23.3 23.3 10.3 10.4 9.2 8.9 9.1 6.9 I- F C C TOTAL ................... WHITE .................... NONWHITE*. ............ m x m 2 m z *In this table, nonwhite includes blacks and those of Hispanic origin. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Population: 1970, PC(1)-C2, Alabama: U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Table 50. --I -1 z ALABAMA POPULATION MIGRATION ALA BA MA POPU LAT ION M I GRATION 19 19 movers into Alabama were white. Urban whites also were more likely to have an out-of-county residence in 1965. Rural residents were more residentially stable than urban residents during this period; a large proportion were samecounty movers. Rural nonwhite residents were the least likely individuals to have a 1965 out-of-county or out-of-state residence, having high same house, same county, same state percentages. These data illustrate the differential migration of individuals into the State by race and place of previous residence. Hispanic and urban white residents were most likely to live out-of-state in 1965, and rural nonwhites the least. Moves made by rural residents were largely same county and same state changes. Finally, Hispanics and urban whites were least likely to have changed residences while staying within their county in the 19651970 period. DETERMINANTS OF MIGRATION This section shifts the level of analysis to counties in the Southern region in order to identify motivating factors in population migration. The economic and industrial conditions that characterize an area influence the propensity of people to move away from or into the area. Three major factors are: employment in agriculture, income levels, and employment in manufacturing. Each factor is introduced and related to differentials in migration among counties in the Southern region. The states included in the Southern region are: Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, W. Virginia, N. Carolina, S. Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas, and the District of Columbia. Employment in Agriculture Changes in the occupational structure of an area represent a major force influencing migration. A decline of an industry may displace those with less competitive skill levels, who must then leave to seek alternative employment opportunities. A major shift in the structure of agricultural production has been a source of such change for many years. This shift has taken two major forms. First, an increase in labor-displacing technology has reduced the need for farm workers. Correspondingly, the scale of farm operations has shifted upward to the point at which a smaller number of farmers operate increasingly larger farms with 20 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION fewer workers. Thus, the labor demands of farming in an area may be reflected in differential levels of migration. Table 7 shows 1960 to 1970 net migration rates for counties in the South, classified by six levels of employment in agriculture in 1960. The data show that counties with 20 percent or less agriculture tended to gain migrants during this period. Counties with 20 or more percent agriculture had increasingly higher levels of out-migration. For nonwhites, net migration was negative in all categories, almost decreasing in a linear manner as percentage employed in agriculture increased. Thus, it appears that the displacement of small farmers by changes in scale and technology contributed significantly to black out-migration in the South. Though other factors were also important, the displacement of small farms and farm labor was a major factor influencing out-migration, particularly for blacks, but for whites as well (7). Income Level The income of an area reflects, to some extent, the opportunity structure available to its residents. Low incomes generally reflect a high availability of labor and/or a low demand for workers. Low incomes may impel individuals to seek areas of higher net advantage. As a result, migration generally occurs towards areas of greater economic opportunity, as indicated by higher incomes for residents. Table 8 shows that individuals living in counties with the lowest median incomes had the highest propensity to migrate for all groups. This is particularly true for nonwhites. White net migration rates became positive two levels below nonwhite rates - $3,000 for whites and $5,000 for nonwhites. Given the generally lower overall skill levels of nonwhites, this finding may be contrary to expectations, that is, nonwhites did not take advantage of smaller increments of new opportunity. The $2,000 gap may partially reflect discriminatory practices. It may also reflect a shift in black values toward life in urbanized areas in other parts of the South and the North. Counties with median incomes of $6,000 or more were associated with the highest net in-migration rates for both whites and nonwhites. These areas appeared to be undergoing the economic expansion necessary to provide much higher employment opportunities than other areas of the South. Particularly, their attractiveness is indicated in the very high TABLE 7. NET MIGRATION RATES 1960-1970 BY 1960 EMPLOYMENT IN AGRICULTURE IN THE SOUTH Total Percent in agriculture Under 10%............. 10.0 - 19.9% ............ 20.0 -29.9%............. 30.0 39.9%............. 40.0- 49.9%............. 50.0 and over .......... Overall................ Total 4.4 1.9 -6.8 -13.4 -17.0 -25.7 1.2 Male 4.0 2.0 -7.1 -13.6 -17.4 -25.9 .9 Net migration rate (Percent of 1970 adjusted expected survivors) White Nonwhite 0 Female 4.7 1.7 -6.6 -13.2 -16.6 -25.6 1.5 Total 5.8 6.2 -2.0 -6.6 Male 5.4 6.2 -2.4 -7.0 -10.9 -12.6 3.8 Female 6.1 6.2 -1.6 -6.2 -9.8 Total -1.3 -14.8 -20.5 -26.6 -29.9 Male -1.7 -14.5 -20.6 26.8 -30.3 Female -.8 -15.0 -20.4 -26.5 D - -v 0 r -10.4 -12.0 4.1 -29.5 -11.5 4.5 -36.0 -9.3 -36.2 -9.7 -35.8 -9.0 0 Source: Gladys K. Bowles and Everett S. Lee. Net Migration of the Population,1960-1970, by Age, Sex, and Color, Population Migration Report 1960-1970, Part 7. (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Printing Department), July 1977. Table 7. TABLE 8. NET MIGRATION RATES 1960-1970 BY INCOME LEVEL IN THE SOUTH Total Income Under $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,500 $2,000..... - $2,999..... - $3,999..... - $4,999..... - $5,999..... - $7,499... and over .... Total -19.3 -9.5 -2.2 3.5 1.2 17.7 25.6 1.2 Male -19.5 -9.3 -2.1 3.1 .6 17.2 24.2 .9 Net migration rate (Percent of 1970 adjusted expected survivors) White Nonwhite Female -19.1 -9.6 -2.4 3.9 1.7 18.0 26.9 1.5 Total -8.8 -4.0 1.5 6.2 1.4 17.3 25.1 4.1 Male -9.1 -4.0 1.5 5.7 .9 16.9 23.7 3.8 Female -8.5 -4.1 1.6 6.7 1.9 Total -32.0 -22.9 -16.0 -7.4 .4 19.6 34.3 -9.3 Male -32.3 -22.8 -15.6 -8.0 -.5 19.0 32.1 -9.7 Female -31.6 -23.0 -16.5 -6.9 1.2 20.2 36.4 -9.0 17.7 26.3 4.5 Over..................... Source: Gladys K. Bowles and Everett S. Lee. Net Migration the Population, 1960-1970, by Age, Sex, and Color, Population Migration Report 1960-1970, Part 7. (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Printing Department), July 1977. Table 6. of 22 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION inmigration rates for blacks in the region. Income level seems to be a major factor shaping migration rates to and from an area. Industrial Employment Industrial employment is a major source of gainful opportunity for individuals in an area. Counties with low levels of industrialization may not generate sufficient opportunities for the existing population, and may have a low attraction for potential in-migrants. In contrast, industrialized areas may attract a disproportionate share of migrants because workers who come to the area often bring other individuals, generally the family, to reside with them near the job. Table 9 shows net migration rates by employment in manufacturing for the South. The greatest out-migration occurred in areas with the smallest concentrations of manufacturing, and in-migration was heaviest in areas where manufacturing employment was intermediate or large. The trend, however, was not evenly consistent across levels of manufacturing employment. Areas with intermediate levels of manufacturing activity tended to be mixed across racial groupings. Nonwhites continued to leave counties in the 10-19.9 percent category, whereas whites tended to return. Conversely, whites tended to leave counties in the 30-39.9 percent category, while nonwhites had net in-migration. The data suggest that manufacturing employment does affect migration, at least when such employment is extremely scarce or extremely abundant. Other factors, however, seem to moderate the effect of manufacturing employment levels on migration. Previous findings have shown that agriculture and income levels have more direct impacts on migration. The results for manufacturing may reflect the influence of those other factors with more immediate effects on migration rates. Other non-economic considerations may be at work in this process too. At some point, manufacturing activity may affect the environmental and aesthetic quality of an area, changing the price and availability of housing in such a way that differentials in migration are created. Proximity to natural areas or recreational facilities also may be factors. In summary, manufacturing employment levels influence migration rates, but other situational factors may have as much or more effect. TRENDS IN MIGRATION 1970-1975 Recent estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau indicate that the r- co 0 C TABLE 9. NET MIGRATION RATES 1960-1970 BY EMPLOYMENT IN MANUFACTURING IN THE SOUTH Total Percent in manufacturing Under 10% ... .............10.0 - 19.9%............... 20.0 -29.9%............... Total 3.2 3.3 4.9 -.5 1.2 Net migration rate (Percent of 1970 adjusted expected survivors) White Nonwhite Female -2.9 3.7 5.1 -. 1 1.6 z Female -8.5 -7.2 3.8 11.4 5.9 30.0 -39.9%...... 40.0 and Male -3.4 2.8 4.7 -. 9 .8 Total 2.4 5.3 5.2 -1.9 .9 Male -2.8 4.8 5.0 -2.2 .6 Female -2.1 5.8 5.3 -1.6 1.3 Total -8.4 -7.5 3.3 10.4 5.3 Male -8.2 -7.7 2.8 9.2 4.6 z over %.... Overall.................. 1.2 .9 1.5 4.1 3.8 4.5 -9.3 -9.7 -9.0 Source: Gladys K. Bowles and Everett S. Lee. Net Migration the Population,1960-1970, by Age, Sex, and Color, Population Migration Report 1960-1970, Part 7, (Athens, Ga.: University of Georgia Printing Department), July 1977. Table 8. of NA 24 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION rural to urban pattern of population change may have halted or even been reversed since 1970. This section discusses some of the reasons that may underlie the shift from 1960-1970 conditions. Data are presented for Alabama counties, and the implications discussed. Urban Versus Rural Migration On the national level, non-metropolitan population increased by 7 percent and metropolitan by 4 percent in the 1970-75 period. Several explanations may account for the recent reversal of a long-standing trend of population loss in rural areas. One perspective attributes the new growth to population spillover occurring largely in areas physically close to and accessible to urban areas. Research has supported this assumption, but it also shows that counties not adjacent to metropolitan areas have experienced a 6 percent population increase. This rate is somewhat less than that found in adjacent counties, but still greater than the increase for either metropolitan counties or the total U.S. Spillover explains part of the growth, but other independent factors also are at work (2). A second argument finds non-metropolitan population growth to be a function of industrial development. New jobs attract individuals and their families. Some evidence exists in support of this idea, but industrialization of rural areas explains only a part of the overall migration turnaround. The presence of a senior state college in a county has been found to be a third major factor explaining in-migration. The growth is due largely to the expansion of these institutions and the age group they serve, the post World War II 'baby boom' generation (5). However, their pace of expansion may have slowed since 1973 with the end of military draft and peaking of college enrollment rates. Another explanation put forth is that recreational and retirement areas play a significant role in determining migration and population redistribution to non-metropolitan counties (3). Non-economic considerations of climate, natural beauty, and availability of leisure activities may be important motivational factors in migration. The previous discussion has identified national migration trends and potential explanations for the findings. The same considerations may be examined among Alabama counties. ALABAMA POPULATION MIGRATION 25 Net Migration in Alabama 1970-1975 Comparing net migration rates for 1960-70 to those for 1970-75, certain marked trends can be noted. In the 1960-70 period, five of 18 metropolitan Alabama counties had a net in-migration; the remaining 13 had a net out-migration. In contrast, ten metropolitan counties had net in-migration during 1970-75, whereas eight lost migrants. In the 1960-70 decade, only three of 49 non-metropolitan counties gained through migration, where 46 counties lost. During the 1970-75 period, 27 counties gained migrants and 22 non-metropolitan counties continued to lose, a striking reversal of the previous trend. Thus, Alabama shifted from a majority loss (based on number of counties) in metropolitan and non-metropolitan counties in the early period, to a majority gain in both cases. The most recent period reveals that the reversal has been much stronger in the non-metropolitan areas. Table 10 classifies the 67 Alabama counties by net gains and losses due to migration in the 1960-70 and 1970-75 periods. Six counties gained during both periods, only two of which were non-metropolitan. Two counties gained, 1960-70, but lost, 197075. Both were the site of military base closings, and reflect the adverse impact of these events. Figure 2 shows the location of these counties. Thirty-one counties experienced net out-migration, followed more recently by net in-migration. These turnaround counties reflect the movement to non-metropolitan areas, as only six of the 31 were metropolitan counties. Contrary to national-level trends, the presence or absence of a 4-year state college had no consistent impact on migration rates. Gain through in-migration was, however, the predominant trend for 37 Alabama counties during the 1970-75 period. Twenty-eight counties continued to have net out-migration. Of these, seven are metropolitan counties, which in the majority of cases, represent central city areas. Central cities are more likely to be losing population to more attractive residential areas, and to undergo increasing conversion of land to industrial use. The non-metropolitan out-migration counties tend to have large nonwhite populations, which are continuing to leave rural counties for large urban areas. Fifteen of the 28 counties that continue to lose migrants have populations that are 40 percent or more nonwhite. In contrast, only three of 31 turnaround counties have a similar proportion of nonwhites. This trend to 0) TABLE 10. ALABAMA COUNTIES BY NET MIGRATION 1960-1970 GAIN GB Loss AND ESTIMATED NET MIGRATION 1970-1975 CAIN GB LOSS Net migration Net gain 1960-1970 Net gain 1970-1975 -Autauga* -Baldwin Lee+ St. Clair -Shelby *+ Winston* Net gain 1960-1970 Net loss 1970-1975 Dale° -Madison+ Net loss 1960-1970 Net gain 1970-1975 Barbour # Bihh Blount* Cherokee* Chilton Clay Clehurne Coosa Covington Crenshaw Cullman Dekalh* -Elmore* Escamhia Fayette Geneva Henry # Houston * Jackson* Lamar -Lauderdale+ Macon # Marion* -Marshall - Montgomery+ Morgan Pike+ Tallapoosa Net loss 1960-1970 Net loss 1970-1975 Lawrence Bullock # Butler - Limestone+ Lowndes # -Calhoun+ Marengo # Chambers -Mobile+ Choctaw # Monroe # Clarke # Perry* # Coffee Pickens # -Colhert Randolph Connecuh # Dallas # -Russell # w C -Tuscaloosa+ -Walker -Etowah Greene # Hale # -Jeffers on+ Sumter#+ Talledega Washington Wilcox#* C Franklin *Gain or loss greater than 10 percent 1970-1975. #Nonwhite population 40 percent or more of total 1970. -Metropolitan (SMSA) counties +four year State college in county I- m m m Z 0I 0I D, X ALABAMA POPULATION MIGRATION ALABAMA POPULATION MIGRATION 27 27 '~ ~~"""''5~.~;;;:-s'.t::~: '"' ~"""........."'5~'~~~ ' ... ~...;'''...'1'.~........:~ """""....."' ~~~ '''s~t."' ....... "'"""":....... '''''"'''s~z.~~ ""''""~~'r ~ "'~""'~.r .=::: ' ''"""'...... ..':....~~: "......"'r~.. """"'" "'5f= '""'''"' .~~.....z~ .'.'r.'.,"'5+~.. '""''"""' ""~~~ 2...".'~~...... 'z-55 ""~"~i~:fS ...."',. ""~':$' ~~ ......... rs. -rs ""'~~ ~...... ... "'~~~~ ;z~.'Zt.'.'.' ~ ...~s..s~ "' : -rs.z.""' ::-: ............... .'~~~~~~.2;.. "'"'.~:''"lz~~; ~~~.rzzzy;"""""' ~~~...sz""""~=. ---""'r ,....'-zt;s ~=..." t~WILCOX "' ~i ~s~I~ '''' ~T~ """5~~::2;~C~f" """""" 5.5's"=~' .:!~M55.'." "'Z~ttz...... s""'~.f:;--~~~ "'~'"""r+r.eur~r: "'""''~~ 2..."" t~"""" rtt~"~t~ ss""... .. :'.. "';"":"'.C";..;;;'""""''"""' "~ ;"'t=.:"':........:z'r~tr'""LOWI ;;' .- ~-~~:".r""'~ :i"' ~"-5'" st.s2zz; :~:~:~:~:~:~I:~:~:~: ..'.'"''z... IIAHCNCO "'....s--~~r ".."'zz5~~' 5-:"''ss r'.'""~' ssr~5'5 5: """ :DAL~L~S 2.~~. .'."" . "'......"" t.~~'.'---''f5f;r;I;"srsS~~~~.'f.';":t~ ....5-i'~ ''.~~.:UCINR~F :55~~i ;....... ';';"' ...-rs~.... "'-';~~.' '"""" .t..... ~j~:~:~ ,,~~~""' ~I " ~iii~" ~~.. "'. ";1 ..... ...... FIGURE 2. NET MIGRATION IN ALABAMA 28 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION outmigration for nonwhites should slow as the pool of potential migrants diminishes and others become attracted to the area. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION This report is a review of migration trends in Alabama in the 1960-70 decade and in the 5-year period between 1970 and 1975. In the earlier period, Alabama reflected national and regional trends of rural out-migration and decline. Urban areas in the State, however, also lost population, contrary to the pattern found in the nation and larger region. Alabama's out-migration stream during this time was composed of a large proportion of blacks seeking destinations in the urban North. Small number of middle-aged whites were returning to the State but were vastly outnumbered by the massive outflux of blacks of nearly all ages. Almost all metropolitan areas lost migrants, though Huntsville and Montgomery were major exceptions to the urban trend in the State. Nearly all black age groups and most white age groups left urban areas, seeking opportunities and jobs outside the State. Non-metropolitan Alabama gained large numbers of middle-aged white migrants, though black continued to leave at high rates. Reflecting a pattern found in rural and urban areas, those to leave the State in greatest numbers were men and women of all races in their twenties. Young adults are most impacted by opportunity differentials, seeking more advantageous labor markets and social environments. This group often has fewer investments in their current situation which often impede migration for more established residents. Income levels were found to be a major factor affecting migration among counties in the Southern region. Departure rates were highest in the lowest income counties and arrivals greatest in high income areas. Industrial employment levels affected migration among counties in the Southern region. Industrial employment levels affected migration at the extremes; very high industrial employment was associated with inmigration, very low with out-migration, and uneven effects were found in the intermediate ranges. Declines in agricultural employment were clearly associated with out-migration. Structural changes in the agriculture sector were a major source of the 1960-70 out-migration stream from ALABAMA POPULATION MIGRATION A LABAMA POPU LATION M IG RATION 29 2 rural counties. In the most recent period, the agricultural situation began to stabilize, and other factors began to fuel a return migration to non-metropolitan areas. Part of the increased attraction of rural areas in the nation as a whole, and the South in particular, may be attributed to completion of the interstate highway system. Many places became accessible for the first time to regional and national markets. New highway construction opened up many parts of the South to manufacturing plants and other types of development. Migration trends in the future are likely to reflect Alabama's position as a Sunbelt State and its growing role as an industrial center for the Southeast. Migrants are good for an area because they bring new ideas, perspectives, and heterogeneity to a population. Existing residents generally benefit by the presence of their new neighbors, but they also may incur certain costs associated with the absorption of new arrivals. An increasing population places new demands on local schools and public services, particularly in rural areas. A certain amount of disorganization is associated with new individuals without local ties or involvements. Nevertheless, migration to an area is a major source and consequence of growth and development. Migration will doubtless be a major determinant of the future character of Alabama's population. 30 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION LITERATURE CITED (1) Alabama County Data Book. 1977. Alabama Development Office, Montgomery, Alabama. (2) Beale, Calvin L. June 1975. The Revival of Population Growth in Non-metropolitan America. Economic Development Division, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, ERS-605. Washington, D.C. (3) Beale, Calvin L. and Glenn V. Fugitt. August 1975. The New Pattern of Non-metropolitan Population Change. Center for Demography and Ecology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. (4) Bowles, Gladys K. and Everett S. Lee, July 1977. Net Mitration of the Population, 1960-70, by Age, Sex, and Color. Population-Migration Report, 1960-70, Part 7. University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia. (5) DeJong, Gordon F. and Ralph R. Sell. January 1977. Population Redistribution, Migration, and Residential Preferences. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. delphia, Pennsylvania. Poplin, Dennis E. 1972. Communities: A Survey of Theories and Methods of Research. MacMillan Publishing Company, New York, N.Y. (6) (7) Smith, T. Lynn and P. E. Zopf, Jr. 1970. Principles of Inductive Rural Sociology. F. A. Davis Company, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. AUBURN UNIVERSITY With an agricultural research unit in every major soil area, Auburn University serves the needs of field crop, livestock, forestry, and horticultural producers in each region in Alabama. Every citizen of 1 7- the State has a stake in this research program, since any advantage from new and more economical ways of producing and handling farm products Y directly benefits the consuming public. Research Unit Identification 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Tennessee Valley Substation, Belle Mina Sand Mountain Substation. Crossvilie North Alabama Horticulture Substation, Cullman Upper Coastal Plain Substation, Winfield Forestry Unit, Fayette County Thorsby Foundation Seed Stocks Farm. Thorsby Chilton Area Horticulture Substation, Clanton Forestry Unit, Coosa County Piedmont Substation, Camp Hill Plant Breeding Unit, Tallassee Forestry Unit Autauga County Prattville Experiment Field, Prattville Black Belt Substation, Marion Junction Lower Coastal Plain Substation. Camden Forestry Unit, Barbour County Monroeville Experiment Field Monroeville Wiregrass Substation. Headland Brewton Experiment Field. Brewton Ornamental Horticulture Field Station, Spring Hill Gulf Coast Substation Fairhope