It’s Harder To Be A California Farmer

Will Water Disputes Take Agricultural Land Out of Production?

Does California have enough water to revitalize domestic commodity crop production? It's an important question to consider in light of possible tariffs on Mexican imports and a growing consumer interest in food supply chains. California generates $50 billion in agricultural revenue on a yearly basis. The state employs roughly 420,000 laborers to produce 13% of the nation's agricultural outputs. Production depends on usable water supplies. 

California farmers are up against several obstacles including severe weather and drought disasters, high fuel prices, and one of the highest minimum wage rates in the country. Land is more expensive to obtain whether purchased or leased and because California is a frontrunner in climate and environmental innovations, many farming practices are subject to additional regulation.  Yet, what appears to be the straw that breaks the farmer’s back is water. 

What is the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act?

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act established in 2014 mandated water management plans for much of California 's underground system of basins. The goal has always been to maintain water quality, protect usable water supplies while also safeguarding reserves. A decrease in snowfall and the melt off that supplies the water sources California relies on increased concern over future availability. The intentions of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act meant to secure water for future farming have made for a complex and expensive regulatory process for the state’s farmers.

While many of the nation’s growers are able to freely pump ground water or purchase water rights when they purchase farmland, most California growers must pay fees for irrigated water per unit used.  Added to high fuel costs, rising minimum wage levels and cheaper imports, California farmers have struggled to stay competitive in recent years and have relocated or left farming altogether.

Will California Take Land Out of Production?

In the Pajaro Valley of California farmers have managed to decrease water usage by 20% by incentivizing conservation methods. After losing an entire harvest of strawberries decades ago due to contaminated water from depleted aquifers, farmers in the valley have worked to protect agriculture in the region by protecting the water. Though it is expensive and the system isn’t perfect, farmers in the area are grateful they have the water supply to keep their land in production.

Parts of California, Nevada, Arizona and Utah rely on the Colorado River for water.  Under the Biden administration farmers in these states were paid to not use water for two to three months every year for three years. Alfalfa was the main crop targeted as it can recover quickly once water returns and alfalfa crops in this area can be harvested up to eight times a year. The move will no doubt decrease water consumption in the Lower Basin, but it does not help to revitalize domestic production of commodity crops, nor does it represent a long term solution to water management. Farmers have been slow to partner with programs such as these. There is a fear that under a new administration funding for incentives like this will vanish. Farmers are also concerned that once they place their agricultural land in this category, it will be hard to get it back into full production.

Water has played a crucial role in the types of crops California farmers are gravitating towards. Fruit, nuts and vegetables are in greater production compared to other crops because they produce a higher income per unit of water used. But in general, farmers have downsized production of all commodities. Not so long ago southern California had 27,000 acres of table grape crops. Today there are only around 2,000 acres.  The same is true for other fruit and vegetable crops like asparagus which reached peak production at 30,000 acres, but today only accounts for 300 acres. While labor shortages, fuel costs and weather have each had a hand in adding pressure to farming operations in California, without water, none of it matters.

In the Imperial Valley, a portion of the state that was once desert, cutting off water supply would spell an end for the farming of sugar beets, lettuce and corn. It is home to 300,000 beef cows and the communities that have developed around these agricultural industries. Yet, it exists because of a man made waterway created to pull water off the Colorado River. If we stopped sending water to the desert region the river could return to a healthier state.  But can the United States afford to take this land out of production?

Possible tariffs are expected to decrease international demand for feedstocks like corn and soybeans but expand markets for domestically produced fruits and vegetables. California farmers could potentially increase their outputs as they become more competitive with higher priced imports. If that is the case than California will need its arable acres to remain in production; and as some would argue, to be farmed by people with close ties to the land who are thinking about water usage now and how it will affect water supplies in the future