Hubbry Logo
Agriculture in CaliforniaAgriculture in CaliforniaMain
Open search
Agriculture in California
Community hub
Agriculture in California
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Agriculture in California
Agriculture in California
from Wikipedia

California produces almonds worth $5.3 billion every year. That is 100% of commercial almonds in the United States, 100% of all of North America, and 80% of commercial almonds around the world.

Agriculture is a significant sector in California's economy, producing nearly US$50 billion in revenue in 2018. There are more than 400 commodity crops grown across California, including a significant portion of all fruits, vegetables, and nuts in the United States.[1] In 2017, there were 77,100 unique farms and ranches in the state, operating across 25.3 million acres (10,200,000 hectares) of land. The average farm size was 328 acres (133 ha), significantly less than the average farm size in the U.S. of 444 acres (180 ha).[1]

Because of its scale, and the naturally arid climate, the agricultural sector uses about 40 percent of California's water consumption.[2] The agricultural sector is also connected to other negative environmental and health impacts, including being one of the principal sources of water pollution.

Value

[edit]
Rice paddies just north of Sacramento

The table below shows the top 21 commodities, by dollar value, produced in California in 2017.[1] From 2016 to 2017, there were increases by more than 2% in total value for the following crops: almonds, dairy, grapes and cattle. The largest increase was seen in almond sales, which increased by 10.9% from 2016 to 2017, due to both increases in crop volume produced and the average market price for a pound of almonds. Dairy sales increased 8.2% from 2016 to 2017 due to an increase in the average price for milk, despite a slight decrease in total milk production. Grape sales increased by 3.1% from 2016 to 2017 due to an increase in price per ton of grape (from $832 per short ton ($917/t) in 2016 to $847 per short ton ($934/t) in 2017). Cattle sales also increased by 2.7% from 2016 to 2017.[3][4]

Crop Annual value (billions of USD)
Dairy (milk and cream) $6.56
§ Grapes $5.79
§ Almonds $5.60
§ Cannabis (legal sales) $3.1
§ Strawberries $3.1
Cattle and Calves $2.63
§ Lettuce $2.51
Walnuts $1.59
§ Tomatoes $1.05
Pistachios $1.01
Broilers (poultry) $0.94
Oranges $0.93
§ Broccoli $0.85
Hay $0.76
Rice $0.68
Carrots $0.62
Lemons $0.61
Tangerines $0.54
Cotton $0.48
§ Raspberries $0.45
Garlic $0.39
David Packard's home and apricots

Specific crops

[edit]

Alfalfa

[edit]

Orloff et al., 2009 find Glyphosate use in this crop is driving resistance here.[5]: 230  Blythe, California grows nearly 50,000 acres of Alfalfa. 15,000 acres of this alfalfa land are owned by a Saudi Arabia-based Almarai, and this feed is exported to Saudi Arabia.[6]

Almonds

[edit]

California produces 80% of the world's almonds and 100% of the United States commercial supply.[7] Although almonds are not native to California, a hot, dry Mediterranean climate and developed water infrastructure create favorable conditions for commercial cultivation of the crop.[8] In 2020, there were 1.25 million acres (5,100 km2) devoted to almond farming in California, producing 2.8 billion pounds (1.3 Mt).[9]

Almonds are the state's most valuable export crop.[7] Farmers exported $4.9 billion worth to foreign countries in 2019, about 22% of the state's total agricultural exports, with the European Union, China and India as leading destinations.[7]

California almond farms import the majority of US commercial bee colonies to the state of California during the almond pollination season. Almond production in California is the source of several major environmental problems, including high demand for water and abundant waste of almond shells. As of 2021, due to a historic long-term drought in California, production was forecast to decline, and many almond orchards were being abandoned.[10]

Shipping disruptions, reductions in consumer spending, and trade disputes during 2020-21 caused by the COVID-19 pandemic affected logistics and pricing of almonds.[9]

Almonds contribute a mean of 0.77 pounds emissions per acre per year in Mediterranean agriculture systems.[11]

Apple

[edit]

The Fuji variety is a recent import from Fujisaki, Aomori, Japan.[12][13] Introduced in the 1980s,[13] it quickly became the most produced apple here.[12]

Apricot

[edit]

For a common pest see § Cucumber Beetle.[14]

Huntington Library

Avocados

[edit]

California farms produce 90% of all U.S.-grown avocados, with the great majority being of the Hass variety.[15] In 2021[16] the state harvest was 135,500 short tons (122,900 t) on 46,700 acres (18,900 ha) for a yield of 2.9 short tons per acre (6.5 t/ha), and at $2,430 per short ton ($2,679/t) that brought $327,369,000. Drought and heat can significantly reduce the harvest in some years.[17] The Polyphagous Shothole Borer and the associated disease it carries have been a great concern here since their discovery on home avocado trees in LA County in 2012.[18] Immediately eradication and quarantine efforts were instituted, and are continuing.[18] (See § Polyphagous shot hole borer below.)

For two invasive pests which have significantly reduced grower earnings[19] see § Avocado Thrips and § Persea Mite.

Barley

[edit]

Barley stripe rust was first found near Tehachapi in May 1915 on Hordeum murinum by Johnson and reported by Humphrey et al., 1924.[20]: 9  Hungerford 1923 and Hungerford & Owens 1923 found the pathogen on cultivated barley in the central part of the state and also on H. murinum here.[20]: 9  See also § Stripe Rust.

Blueberry

[edit]

The California Blueberry Commission represents growers.[21] UC IPM provides integrated pest management plans[22] for blueberry (Vaccinium spp.).

Broccoli

[edit]
Pesticide test plot, Salinas
Broccoli field, Salinas

Almost all of the country's broccoli is grown here.[23] In 2021 that was 11,200 planted acres (4,500 ha), all of which was harvested.[23] The yield was 130.0 short hundredweight per acre (14,570 kg/ha; 13,000 lb/acre) for a harvest of 1,512,000 short hundredweight (68,600 t; 75,600 short tons).[23] There was only trace wastage.[23] Selling at a price of $51.50 per short hundredweight ($0.5150/lb; $1.135/kg), the year sold for $631,455,000.[23]

For an invasive pest of this crop see the painted bug § Bagrada hilaris.[24]

The typical biomass of harvest residue in the coastal regions is 5 dry short tons per hectare (1.8 t/acre).[25] This is not necessarily a waste product, as it can be useful as fumigant.[25]

Caneberry

[edit]
California Blackberry

Caneberries (Rubus spp.) grown here include raspberry (see § Raspberry), blackberry, dewberry, olallieberry, and boysenberry.[26]

For a common disease of erect and trailing caneberry (excluding raspberry), see § Leaf Spot of Caneberry.

Cannabis

[edit]
Emerald Triangle

Cannabis is estimated to be the largest cash crop in California with a value of more than $11 billion.[27] The state provided most of the cannabis consumed in the United States prior to legalization which was intended to provide a transition to legal, licensed growing. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a detailed analysis of the environmental impact of growers operations. Statewide, 208 growers had obtained regular, annual licenses by July 2019. At this point of some 18 months into legalization, 1,532 growers were still operating on provisional permits as they went through the CEQA process that requires extensive paperwork.[28] Smaller farms were given five years to become established under legalization before larger growers were allowed to enter the market.[29] Under the regulations set to expire in 2023, growers can have only one medium licence but there is no limit on the number of small licenses an individual grower can have. This loophole has allowed larger growers to operate.[30]

Humboldt, Mendocino, and Trinity counties have long been known as Northern California's Emerald Triangle as it is estimated that 60 percent or more of all cannabis consumed in the United States is grown there. Registering and applying for permits has not been an easy decision for many long time growers in these three counties.[27]

In Santa Barbara County, cannabis growing has taken over greenhouses that formerly grew flowers. In the first four months of legalization, the county had almost 800 permits issued for cultivators, the most of any county in the state.[30]

Calaveras County registered more than seven hundred cultivators after county voters approved a tax in 2016.[31]

Cherries

[edit]
Cherry Valley

The California Cherry Board[32] is a state marketing order representing growers and intermediaries here.[33] The USDA FAS's Market Access Program funds international advertising especially in Canada, South Korea, Japan, China, and Australia.[33] The state produces the earliest crop in the year[33] starting in mid-April.[34] Lasting until early or mid-June every year, this is the second heaviest harvest after Washington.[34]

Planting density is usually about 100 trees per acre (250/ha) and the first real crop will be about six years later.[34] Honey bees are essential to pollination for this crop.[34] Cultivars grown here[35] are harvested by hand with the stem (pedicel).[34]

The center of the state produces a large percentage of the crop[36] and San Joaquin County, near Lodi is the highest producing county.[34] Many of these are Bing.[34] As of 2022 newer Bing strains with better heat tolerance have recently been planted here as well as counties further south.[34]

Birds are common pests in cherry orchards.[37][38]

Citrus

[edit]

Citrus cultivation in California began with the Spanish missionaries, who planted oranges and lemons at Baja California around 1739 and at Alta California missions by 1769. Early fruit was thick-skinned and sour, not suited for commercial markets. The first sizable grove was established at Mission San Gabriel in 1804, with about 400 trees on six acres. This mission-based agriculture ended with secularization which closed the missions and gave away their lands in 1835. Jean-Louis Vignes likely planted the first private orange grove in Los Angeles in 1834. William Wolfskill was the first commercial citrus grower in California, planting his orchard in Los Angeles in 1841. By 1862, his orchards held two-thirds of California's orange trees, marking him as the founder of the state's commercial citrus industry. The California gold rush (from 1849) increased demand for oranges, especially for their vitamin C, which helped prevent scurvy among miners. This spurred gradual expansion of orchards. In the early 1870s, Wolfskill's reported profits of $1,000 per acre attracted more farmers to citrus growing.[39][40]

Advertisement for the Valencia orange, which became the major industrial crop by the 1920s--but despite the illustration this particular variety was unknown in the mission era.

The 1870s saw the introduction of improved fruit varieties. In 1873, navel orange plants from Brazil were distributed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Luther C. Tibbets and Eliza Tibbets successfully cultivated these in Riverside, leading to widespread planting of the sweet, seedless navel orange, which became the backbone of the California citrus industry. The Valencia orange, introduced in 1876, matured in summer and fall, complementing the winter-ripening navel and providing oranges year-round. The Eureka lemon (from Sicily) and Lisbon lemon (from Spain) were introduced in the same period, offering improved varieties and year-round crops. Grapefruit was introduced from Florida in the 1880s. The completion of major railroads (Southern Pacific in 1877, and the Santa Fe in 1885) and the introduction of ventilated boxcars revolutionized distribution, opening national markets and triggering a planting frenzy in southern California. By 1885, the number of citrus trees in California had grown from 90,000 (in 1875) to 2 million, and to 4.5 million by 1901.[41]

The 1890s brought pest control advances (spraying, fumigation) and frost protection (heaters, later wind machines). The University of California established its Citrus Experiment Station in 1907, supporting research and innovation. Cooperative marketing emerged with the formation of the California Fruit Growers Exchange in 1905, later known as Sunkist Growers Inc., which helped standardize and market California citrus worldwide.[42][43]

In the early 20th century California dominated the nation's citrus supply, especially from Los Angeles and Orange counties. Since then the geography has shifted. Florida is now dominant in oranges. By the 1980s, California supplied about 75% of the nation's lemons. It was the second largest orange producer in the U.S., ranked third in grapefruit, and was a major source of limes and tangerines. Today about 90% of the state's citrus production is located in five counties, namely Fresno, Kern, Tulare, Ventura and Riverside. Apart from home gardens, citrus is no longer a factor in Orange and Los Angeles counties.[44]

The Mediterranean climate affords a lower rate of post-harvest disease than in some of the world's growing regions, similar to the Mediterranean itself, Australia, and most of South Africa.[45]: 6  Postharvest problems that do occur tend to be mostly blue and green Penicillium spp.[45]: 6  The Asian citrus psyllid was discovered in Southern California in 2008 and eradication and quarantine are now underway.[46][47] (See § Asian citrus psyllid below.)

Cotton

[edit]

Gossypium spp. are extensively grown in the Imperial Valley.[48]

§ Pink Bollworm spread to California from its original introduction in Texas.[49] Despite wide establishment elsewhere in the southwest the San Joaquin Valley did not suffer permanent establishment.[50] SJV was protected by its sterile insect technique (SIT) program although neighbouring areas were continuously infested.[50] UC IPM provides management information.[51]

California was an early adopter of Bt cotton, but at a low proportion of acreage.[52] The SJV does not use it at all.[53] However Bt resistance has been slow to develop here and in Arizona and in Texas.[54] In the California/Arizona population Tabashnik et al., 2022 find Cry1Ac resistance and Cry2Ab resistance are common but the causative mutations do not cause Vip3Aa resistance.[55]

§ Bemisia tabaci strain B is common in the Imperial Valley.[56] The use of pyrethroids in the 1980s failed to control it and in deed caused a population increase.[56]

The southwest water shortage is reducing yield and acreage in the 2020s.[57]

Interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) surveys show this crop is a significant cause of groundwater-related subsidence.[58]

§ 1,3-dichloropropene and § Chloropicrin are effective against the complex of § Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. vasinfectum and § Nematode.[5]

Ortiz et al., 2017 provides a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method which differentiates the California race 4 strain from all others based on the PHO gene.[59] University of California Integrated Pest Management (UC IPM) provides practices for its control[60] including Glenn County.[61]

Some Pythium spp. are seedborne diseases in cotton.[62][63] UC IPM provide management information.[62]

Several Tetranychus spider mite species are common on cotton here  including the Pacific Spider Mite (Tetranychus pacificus), the Two-Spotted Spider Mite (T. urticae)[64]: 18  and T. cinnabarinus.[65]

Eradication of the § Pink Bollworm in this and neighbouring states was greatly aided by the deployment of Bt cotton.[66] The eradication program began elsewhere and was extended to the California Cotton Belt in 2007.[67] Dennehy et al., 2011 find bollworm remained 100% susceptible to Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab2 through 2005 here and in Arizona.[68]

Pyrethrins are commonly used in this crop.[69]

Deynze et al., 2005 performs the first gene flow analysis in California cotton.[70] Deynze finds pollinators are responsible for almost 100%.[70][71]

Lacewings[72] and whiteflies (§ Bemisia tabaci strain B)[73] are common pests of this crop.

G. barbadense is grown in a small part of the country including the southern part of this state.[74]

Delia platura is a common seed predator of this crop.[75]

Limonius spp. are pests of germination and seedling stage.[76]

§ Lygus hesperus is often confused for other species including some beneficial insects.[77]

Spodoptera praefica is a late season pest and rarely an early season pest.[78]

§ Blapstinus spp. affect seedlings.[79]

Empoasca fabae is the most common leafhopper in the San Joaquin Valley.[80]

Euschistus servus damages bolls.[81]

§ Spodoptera exigua is a pest of seedlings, young plants, squares and early bolls.[82]

Caliothrips fasciatus is a pest of the mature plant.[83]

The larvae of § Heliothis virescens are pests of bolls and squares.[84]

Gryllus spp. are pests of the early stages.[65]

Bucculatrix thurberiella's harm is limited to the southern deserts only.[85]

Autographa californica is found mostly in May and early June here.[86]

§ Aphis gossypii is the most common aphid in this crop.[87]

§ Agrotis ipsilon is a pest of the young plants.[88]

Cucumbers

[edit]
Campbell farmer's market

From 1997–2000,[89] the state's acreage varied between 10,500–11,000 acres (4,200–4,500 ha) bringing in $57,969,000–$67,744,000. By 2021[16] however the harvest was down to 1,038,500 short hundredweight (47,110 t; 51,920 short tons) from 6,700 acres (2,700 ha) for a yield of 155 short hundredweight per acre (17.4 t/ha; 7.8 short ton/acre), and at $23.2 per short hundredweight ($510/t; $464/short ton) that brought only $24,043,000.

Dairy

[edit]
USDA photo of dairy cow in pasture, California
The California dairy industry is a significant part of the agricultural output of the state of California. Milk has the highest farm revenue among California agricultural commodities. California ranks first out of the fifty states in dairy production. In 2020 the state had about 1,300 dairy farms and 1.727 million dairy cows.[90] As of 2018, the state produced nearly 20 percent of all U.S. milk.[91]

Dates

[edit]

Over 90% of US production is grown here, and most of that in the Coachella Valley.[92] The distant second is Arizona.[92] The 2020 harvest was 49,300 short tons (44,700 t) from 12,500 acres (5,100 ha), for a yield of 3.94 short tons per acre (8.8 t/ha).[92] The year's crop sold for $114 million, an average of $2,320 per short ton ($2,557/t).[92] The harvest extends from the beginning of October to the middle of December.[93]

The detection of the Red Palm Weevil (Rhynchophorus ferrugineus) in 2010 was very concerning to this valuable industry.[94][95] See § Red Palm Weevil.

Figs

[edit]
Santa Rosa

Calimyrna is a common cultivar here.[96][97]

Commodity figs here suffer from many insect pests here. See § Carpenter worm, § Darkling ground beetle, § Dried fruit beetle, § Freeman sap beetle, § Confused sap beetle, § Fig beetle, § Fig mite, § Fig scale, and § Navel orangeworm.

For common diseases see § Fig Smut and § Alternaria Rot of Fig.

Fish and shellfish

[edit]

Relative to traditional farming, aquaculture is a small part of California's agricultural economy, generating only $175 million in 2014.[98] Oysters, abalone, mussels, channel catfish, rainbow trout, and salmon are farmed commercially.[99]

Grapes

[edit]

The 2020 table grape harvest was worth $2.12 billion[100] while wine grapes brought in $1.7 billion, down 15.3% year-on-year. By weight, this was 17% lower versus 2018.[101] The next year, 2021[102] saw a much better yield. From 829,000 acres (335,000 ha) viniculturists got 6.94 short tons per acre (15.6 t/ha) for a total harvest of 5,755,000 short tons (5,221,000 t).[102] At an average of $909 per short ton ($1,002/t) they were paid $5,229,902,000 for the season.[102] Of that, 4,844,600 short tons (4,394,900 t) were for destined for processing industries (including wine, see § Wine below) and at $835 per short ton ($920/t) that was worth $4,046,382,000.[102] The fresh (table grape) harvest was 910,400 short tons (825,900 t) and selling at a price of $1,300 per short ton ($1,433/t), this sector was worth $1,183,520,000 for the season.[102]

The table grape and wine grape sectors are represented by the [103] and the California Association of Winegrape Growers.[104]

Table production is most concentrated in three counties and somewhat in another two.[105] Dollar value annually is $1,240 million in Kern, $682 in Tulare, $416 in Fresno, and in the top ten crops in Riverside and Madera.[105] California's own consumption of table production grew from 1980 to 2001 from 1.8 to 3.5 kilograms (4.0 to 7.7 lb) per capita per year.[106] Consumption here and throughout the country is so high that the country remains a net importer despite this state's production, which reached 71,000 short tons (64,000 t) in the 2015 table harvest.[106]

During dormancy, UC IPM recommends pruning.[107] UC IPM publishes recommendations for this and other tasks during dormancy.[107] Although thinning is often proven to improve wine qualities in many areas, some reviewers note a lack of benefit in thinning table grapes in this state's vineyards.[108]

Deyett et al., 2020 finds Proteobacteria are the most common components of the microbiomes of this crop in this state's soils.[109]

This crop has also played a large part in farm labor relations in the state.[110]: 371  The Delano grape strike began among table grape workers before spreading to other industries.[110]: 371  See § Labor.
Along the Colorado River

Lettuce

[edit]

UCCE's Vegetable Research & Information Center provides comprehensive production advice for this crop.[111]

Lettuce (Lactuca sativa) is commercially grown in the Central Valley, Central Coast, and deserts (the Imperial and Coachella valleys).[112] It is one of the most labor-intensive crops in the state.[113]

Aphids are a major problem for lettuce on the Central Coast.[114] See § Nasonovia ribisnigri for an important aphid, and § Toxomerus marginatus and § Platycheirus stegnus for biocontrols.

The Beet Armyworm (BAW, Spodoptera exigua) is a polyphagous insect pest in this crop.[115] There is wide geographic variation in timing with BAW, the San Joaquin Valley being vulnerable more in fall than spring, the Central Coast late summer, and lower desert valleys September and October in established crops and November and December in young plants.[115] Natural control is significant, from parasitoids Hyposoter exiguae, Chelonus insularis, and Lespesia archippivora, and Spodoptera exigua nuclear polyhedrosis virus (SeNPV).[116][115] Discing as soon as possible after harvest and weed control to deny alternate hosts will help.[115] Insecticides used include methoxyfenozide, Bacillus thuringiensis ssp. aizawai, SeNPV, chlorantraniliprole, spinosad, indoxacarb, emamectin benzoate, methomyl, ζ-cypermethrin, and permethrin.[115] In organic, Bacillus thuringiensis and Entrust are used but note that any spinosad (including Entrust) will also harm the parasitoids.[115]

Melons

[edit]

For a common pest see § Cotton Aphid.

Nectarines

[edit]
1893 engraving of a Mission with nectarine trees

Because nectarines are hairless peaches, for most information see § Peaches.

Oak

[edit]

Oaks (genus Quercus) are cultivated for ornamental purposes and sometimes for acorns.[117] For a devastating disease see § Sudden Oak Death.

Okra

[edit]

Okra is not produced in any significant amount here.[118] Imperial County grows the largest number of acres in the state.[118]

Oleander

[edit]

Oleander (Nerium spp.) suffers from various Xylella fastidiosa diseases here and there is some question as to whether and to what degree it shares inoculum with other crops including food crops.[119]

B. R. Cohn Winery, 2008

Olives

[edit]

Newton Pierce surveyed olive culture in the state and throughout the country for the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) in 1897.[120]

Olives throughout the state suffer from the introduced Olive Fruit Fly.[121] Neofusicoccum mediterraneum, Diplodia mutila, and D. seriata cause significant disease here.[122] More specific controls than currently available are needed for N. mediterraneum in highly susceptible cultivars, namely Sevillano and Gordal, and early harvest may be needed for D. seriata.[122] See § Olive Fruit Fly, § Neofusicoccum mediterraneum, § Diplodia mutila, and § Diplodia seriata.

The Olive Oil Commission of California was founded in 2014 as an entity of the State of California. The commission was established as a result of a bill introduced by Lois Wolk.[123] The primary goal is to improve the sales of olive oil grown in California.[124]

Parsley

[edit]

Soil solarization is an alternative to soil treatment with methyl bromide.[125] Stapleton et al., 2005 eliminate almost 100% of annual weeds in this crop with solarization alone.[125] It completely fails against yellow nutsedge however.[125]

Peaches

[edit]
On sale at a grocery store in Fortuna, 2014
Grocery store in Fortuna, 2014
Blooming trees, Redlands
Redlands
Fortuna Farmers' Market, 2016
Yokuts woman and two boys preparing peaches on the Tule River Reservation ~1900AD
Yokuts, Tule River Reservation ~1900AD
Yuba City

California is the country's largest grower of peaches, producing about 70% of the total.[126]

The California Freestone Peach Association (CFPA)[127] and California Canning Peach Association/California Cling Peach Board (CCPA)[127][128] represent the industry.[129] (Although the CFPA is a separate incorporation, it has always been operated by the CCPA's staff.) The overwhelming majority of the country's peaches are grown here, in 2020 468,000 short tons (425,000 t) for sales of $308.3 million.[130] Since 1980 the total value of the harvest has been slightly increasing.[130] The acreage (hectares) planted in peach has been declining however, down to 73,000 acres (30,000 ha) as of 2020.[130]

As of 2021 cling deliveries for processing purposes have been on a downward trend for years.[131] From 430,000 short tons (390,000 t) in 2010, delivered tonnage declined to 225,000 short tons (204,000 t) in 2021.[131] Cling yield shows no clear trend over the same time, bouncing between 18.1 short tons per acre (41 t/ha) and 15.3 short tons per acre (34 t/ha).[131]

Prices have been trending mostly upward, from $317 per short ton ($349/t) in 2012 to $518 per short ton ($571/t).[131]

CCPA expects 2022 deliveries to be between 214,200–232,400 short tons (194,300–210,800 t) from a yield of 15.3–16.6 short tons per acre (34–37 t/ha).[131]

UCD hosts one of the major breeding programs in the country.[132] Most of the private breeding programs for peach in the country are found in California, with a significant amount of the public breeding also being performed here.[132]

Pear

[edit]
Trees
A field of growing pear trees

Cultivation is heavily pesticide-dependent.[133] In the 1970s that put growers on the "pesticide treadmill" – increasing control costs, resistance, and resurgence of previously controlled adversaries.[133] In response the orchards, the UC system, and Sacramento have put together IPM plans which have increased control and decreased applications.[133] Fire Blight is a major concern as it is throughout the continent.[134] Fire Blight is so severe that it largely determines what areas may be commercially successful in pear and which may not, restricted to geographies inhospitable to epidemics.[134] Even so, antibacterials are necessary.[134] Experts believe that major efficacy loss or a regulatory ban would effectively end Bartlett cultivation here, 55% of the country's pears.[134]

UCR provides integrated pest management best practices through UCANR.[135] Pear Psylla is one of the most serious of these pests, both due to its speed of insecticide resistance evolution and because it vectors[136] the pear decline phytoplasma.[137] The Asian pears P. serotina and P. ussuriensis have been widely used as rootstocks but are not being used in new plantings because their severe vulnerability to the decline phytoplasma.[137] The California Pear Sawfly (Pristiphora abbreviata, not to be confused with the Pear Slug Caliroa cerasi) is a minor pest here and usually easily controlled.[138] UC IPM recommends Entrust and Success (two Spinosad formulations).[138]

Integrated pest management (IPM) has a long history of successful use in this crop.[139]

Pistachios

[edit]

Total pistachio acreage increased from 106,000 to 554,000 acres (43,000 to 224,000 ha) between 2002 and 2022 as the hardy trees can thrive with moderately salty water and soil, which is widespread in parts of the Central Valley.[140]

Ferrisia gilli is an economically significant pest of pistachio here.[141] F. gilli was formerly known as a California population of F. virgata, only being studied sufficiently to recognize that it is distinguishable from F. virgata due to its severe impact on pistachio and almond in this state.[141] Jackrabbits, cottontails, and brush rabbits mostly damage pistachio trees when other food sources run out in winter or early spring.[142] UC IPM recommends fencing, tree guards, baiting, shooting, repellents, and trapping.[142]

Alternaria and Botryosphaeria dothidea are significant fungal diseases of pistachios here which often receive strobilurin, iprodione, azoxystrobin, and tebuconazole treatments.[143] See § Alternaria and § Botryosphaeria dothidea.

Plums

[edit]
Picking prunes, ~1900-1909
Prunes, 1900s
Picking prunes in Kings County, 1905
Kings County
Drying prunes, 1908 or 1909

96% of the country's prunes and >70% of plums are grown here.[144] Of that, >80% has come from the Sacramento Valley since the 1960s.[144] For an invasive pest in the Bay Area, see § Plum Bud Gall Mite.[145]

Pome

[edit]

Pomes grown here include § Apple and § Pear. For a common disease see § Fire Blight.

Pomegranates

[edit]

In pomegranate (Punica granatum), Black Heart (or "Heart Rot") is one of the most common diseases, as it is around the world.[45]: 192  See § Black Heart.

Prunus

For Prunus spp. see § Stonefruit.

Raspberry

[edit]

Over 80% of US raspberries (Rubus spp.) are grown here.[146] The country's consumption has increased eightfold between 2001 and 2021.[146] This crop is 15% of the state's fresh berry sales.[146] Acreage (number of hectares) before 2014 is unknown, but in that year 6,800 acres (2,800 ha) produced 1.4 million short hundredweight (64,000 t; 70,000 short tons) selling for $434 million, then the next year 9,700 acres (3,900 ha) produced 2 million short hundredweight (91,000 t; 100,000 short tons) worth $547 million, and in 2016 9,700 acres (3,900 ha) produced 2.1 million short hundredweight (95,000 metric tons; 100,000 short tons) for $358 million, worth more than the peach harvest and four times the pear harvest.[146] The state has the opportunity to capture much of the market because as of 2021 most of the raspberry (55%), blackberry, and blueberry market in the country is imported, with Mexico supplying 98% of imported raspberry and they have probably reached their limit.[146] California produces the most fresh market red raspberries, while Washington is highest for the processed market.[146] Because the recent expansion has taken acres that had been pasture, pest and disease pressure is very small – making organic an easy option.[146] The available acreage for that kind of conversion may have reached the limit as of 2021 however.[146] Pre-transplant soil fumigation is necessary in conventional, making organic inviable if this kind of new(-to caneberry) acreage is not available.[146] Driscoll's is the marketer of 90% of raspberries from California and Mexico sold into the US.[146]

Rice

[edit]

By 2006, California produced the second-largest rice crop in the United States,[147] after Arkansas, with production concentrated in six counties north of Sacramento.[148]

California's production is dominated by short- and medium-grain japonica varieties, including cultivars developed for the local climate such as Calrose, which makes up as much as 85% of the state's crop.[149]

Small grains

[edit]

UC ANR (University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources) has a program specifically for small grains.[150] UCANR provides pest management information and cultivation practices and organizes farmer education events.[150] The small grains grown here are primarily wheat, barley, oats, and triticale,[150] see § Barley and § Wheat. UC-IPM also produces publications specifically for pest management in these crops.[151]

Although small grains are not a large part of the overall agricultural productivity of the state, they are important enough in particular locations for ANR to have Extension workers especially for San Diego County,[152] Kings County,[152] San Joaquin County,[152] Siskiyou County,[152] Lassen County,[152] Sutter- and Yuba- and Colusa- Counties,[153][152] Davis,[152] Kern County,[152] Woodland, Yolo County,[152] Tulelake, Siskiyou,[152] Tulare,[152] and Sonoma.[154]

Golden State Grains is an industry initiative which also cooperates extensively with the University of California breeding programs.[155] GSG connects future farmers, present farmers, seed suppliers, processors, and consumers.[155]

See § Wild beet for a weed of these crops.

Stonefruit

[edit]

Stonefruits are crops of the genus Prunus. Largest harvests by weight are almond, apricot, cherry, peach and plum.[citation needed]

So much of North America's stonefruit is grown here that almost all available propagation material is adapted to California specifically.[156] Few accessions are available which are appropriate anywhere else.[156] Even so, these are really made for the previous situation in the state, in which lower densities prevailed and dwarfing rootstocks were not used.[156] With increasing mechanization there is a need for such rootstocks.[156]

Strawberries

[edit]
Strawberry field in Salinas
Strawberries in Carlsbad

Strawberries (Fragaria × ananassa) in the United States are almost entirely grown in California – 86% of fresh and 98% of frozen in 2017[157] – with Florida a distant second.[158][159] The 2017 harvest was 1,461.2 thousand short tons (1,325.6 thousand metric tons) worth $3,100,215,000.[157] Of that 30.0% was from Monterey, 28.6% from Ventura, 20.0% from Santa Barbara, 10.0% from San Luis Obispo, and 9.2% from Santa Cruz.[157] The Watsonville/Salinas strawberry zone in Santa Cruz/Monterey, and the Oxnard zone in Ventura, contribute heavily to those concentrations.

Production has risen almost monotonically, from 2005 when 34,300 acres (13,900 ha) were harvested, yielding 600 short hundredweight per acre (67,000 kg/ha; 60,000 lb/acre), for a total yield of 20,580,000 short hundredweight (933,000 t; 1,029,000 short tons). The average price being $54.60 per short hundredweight ($1.204/kg; $0.5460/lb), the 2005 season's harvest sold for $1,122,834,000.[157]

The California Strawberry Commission is the Agriculture Department body which advocates for strawberry growers. The CSC provides information for both growers[160] and consumers.[158] Some towns have annual strawberry festivals, see Strawberry festival § United States. The Driscoll's company began with strawberries here and still grows and sells here, and they have since expanded to other states, countries, and types of berries.

Cal Poly runs the Strawberry Center[161] for both research, and producer education.

Labor costs have increased drastically since 2018 especially in this crop, see § Labor.

Timber

[edit]

Almost 40% of the state is forest, 39.7 million acres (16.1 million hectares; 62,000 square miles; 161,000 square kilometres).[162] Of that 16.7 million acres (6.8 million hectares; 26,100 square miles; 68,000 square kilometres) was maintained as timberland as of 1996 of which about 77% is softwood.[162] Most lumber grown here is used here in the construction industry and some additional lumber is imported from nearby states and provinces.[162]

Tomatoes

[edit]

The Federal Risk Management Agency provides crop insurance for fresh market tomato here, through the regional office in Davis.[163] 90% of FMT here comes from nine counties, San Joaquin County, Merced, Fresno, San Diego, Kern, Stanislaus, Kings, Tulare, and Sacramento.[164] In 1999 44,000 acres (18,000 ha) were planted, yielding on average 12.5 short tons per acre (28 t/ha), for a gross dollar yield of $5,500 per acre ($14,000/ha).[164]

Tomatoes contribute a mean of 1.77 emissions pounds per acre (1.98 kg/ha) per year in Mediterranean agriculture systems.[11]

Varieties used here widely incorporate Meloidogyne resistance.[165]: 35 

Walnuts

[edit]
Chandler Walnut on a Glenn County farm close to the Sacramento River during harvest season 2023

California walnuts account for nearly all the walnuts grown in the United States. In 2017, walnut production was the seventh most valuable agricultural commodity in California, valued at $1.59 billion in cash receipts.[166]

Walnuts contribute a mean of 1.34 pounds per acre (1.50 kg/ha) emissions per year in Mediterranean agriculture systems.[11]

Wheat

[edit]

Wheat stripe rust is believed to have been present at or before the 1770s due to newspaper reports at the time, and due to the greater prevalence of stripe than leaf or stem.[20]: 3  Hungerford (1923) and Hungerford & Owens (1923) found stripe on wheat here and almost all other western states.[20]: 9 

As first speculated by Tollenaar & Houston 1967,[167] in some years inoculum from the Sierra Nevadas initiates the state's epidemics.[20] Wheat sown in the fall (autumn) in the valleys suffers from stripe rust carried from wild grasses in the mountains.[20] This is not the only source however, as stripe will also overwinter in Sacramento Valley wheat cover.[20] See § Stripe Rust.

Wine

[edit]
Vineyards in the Napa Valley AVA

California wine production has a rich viticulture history since 1680 when Spanish Jesuit missionaries planted Vitis vinifera vines native to the Mediterranean region in their established missions to produce wine for religious services. In the 1770s, Spanish missionaries continued the practice under the direction of the Father Junípero Serra who planted California's first vineyard at Mission San Juan Capistrano.[168][169]

California wine production grew steadily after Prohibition,[170] but was known mostly for its sweet, port-style and jug wine products. As the market favored French brands, California's table wine business grew modestly,[171] but quickly gained international prominence at the Paris Wine Tasting of 1976, when renowned French oenophiles, in a blind tasting, ranked the California wines higher than the premier French labels in the Chardonnay (white) and Cabernet Sauvignon (red) categories.[172] The result caused a 'shock' in viticulture industry since France was regarded as foremost producer of the world's finest table wines. This event contributed to expanding the recognition and prestige of vintners in the New World, specifically, the "Golden State".[173]

The state produces about ninety percent of the American wine supply and is the fourth largest wine producer among the world's independent nations.[174][175] California has more than 4,200 wineries ranging from home-grown and small boutiques to large corporations with international distribution, and even more vineyards and growers, at close to 6,000.[174][176] Wine Country, in Northern California, is an internationally recognized premier wine-growing region.[177]

Livestock

[edit]

Red meat

[edit]

In 2022, California meat production exceeded 181 million pounds of beef, 49 million pounds of pork, and 3 million pounds of mutton.[178] Harris Ranch a ranch and feedlot operation is California's largest beef producer, producing 150 million pounds (68 kt) of beef per year in 2010.[179]

Fowl

[edit]

In 2024, California's 8,864,000 egg-laying chickens produced 201 million eggs, 2.2% of the US total, while leading states Ohio and Iowa each produced over 1 billion eggs.[180]

The domestic fowl industry suffers from avian malaria.[181][182] Chickens (Gallus gallus/G. domesticus) and ducks (Anas platyrhynchos domesticus) are commonly infected, as well as various wild birds.[181] Testing has been done since the Herman group made the first reports of P. relictum infection, in Herman 1951, Herman et al., 1954, and Reeves et al., 1954.[181] (See § Avian malaria and § Plasmodium relictum for the parasite and vectors, and for testing.)

Regions

[edit]

Central Valley

[edit]

The Central Valley of California is one of the world's most productive agricultural regions.[183] More than 230 crops are grown there.[183] On less than one percent of the total farmland in the United States, the Central Valley produces eight percent of the nation's agricultural output by value: US$43.5 billion in 2013.[184] The top four counties in agricultural sales (2007 data) in the U.S. are in California's Central Valley: Fresno ($3.731 billion), Tulare ($3.335 billion), Kern ($3.204 billion), and Merced ($2.330 billion).[185][186]

Its agricultural productivity relies on irrigation both from surface water diversions and from groundwater pumping (wells). About one-sixth of the irrigated land in the U.S. is in the Central Valley.[187] Central Valley groundwater pollution is an ongoing environmental issue in the area.

There are 6,000 almond growers who produced more than 1.8 million tonnes in 2013, about 60 percent of the world's supply.[188][189]

Parts of the Valley are quarantine as of July 2022 due to an ongoing pest eradication.[190][191] The Peach Fruit Fly was found in Chowchilla and this is a threat not only here, but could spread to the entire state, and to a lesser degree the entire country and other locations around the world.[190][191] See § Peach Fruit Fly.

Salinas Valley

[edit]

The Salinas Valley, located within Monterey County, is one of the most productive agricultural regions in California. Monterey County grows over 50% of the national production for leaf lettuce, head lettuce, and celery. It also produces significant percentages of the country's broccoli, spinach, cauliflower, and strawberries.[192] The area is also a significant producer of organic produce, with 68,868 acres in cultivation and annual sales of $412,347,000.

Organic farming

[edit]
Organic cultivation of mixed vegetables in Capay, California

California has more certified organic farms than any other state. In 2016, more than a million acres in the state were certified organic.[193] CA grows 90% or more of the U.S. production of Organic almonds, artichokes, avocados, broccoli, cauliflower, celery, dates, figs, grapes, strawberries, lemons, lettuce, plums, and walnuts.[194]

There are two primary laws that regulate organic production: at a federal level, the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 and at a state level, the California Organic Food and Farming Act of 2016. Both laws lay out standards for production, processing, handling and retailing that must be followed in order to label a product as "organic". The USDA, California Organic Products Advisory Committee, and the California County Agricultural Commissioners monitor and ensure these standards are followed by administering enforcement actions for any violations.[195]

Any agricultural operation selling more than $5,000 in products per year is required to acquire organic certification, if they seek to sell their products under the organic label. Multiple organizations are accredited to certify operations organic.[196]

Environmental and natural resources

[edit]

Water use

[edit]

The largest overall water users in California are the environment, agriculture and urban/ municipal uses.[2] In an average year, about 40% of California's water consumption, or approximately 34.1 million acre-foot (42,100 million cubic metres), is used for agricultural purposes. However, the exact proportion of total water usage for agriculture varies widely between 'wet' and 'dry' years. In wet years, agriculture is responsible for closer to 30% of total water consumption and in dry years closer to 60%.[2] Water for agriculture is used to irrigate more than 9 million acres (36,000 square kilometres) of cropland annually.[197]

Water for agriculture comes from two primary sources: surface water and groundwater. Surface waters include natural bodies of water along with a network of human-built reservoirs with aqueducts and canals that carry water from the source to the agricultural users.[197] Groundwater aquifers range in depth and accessibility across the state, and historically have been used to supplement surface water supplies in dry years.[198]

California is one of the top five states in water use for livestock. Water withdrawals for livestock use in California were 101–250 million US gallons (380,000,000–950,000,000 L)/day in 2010.[199]

Saudi Arabian companies and individuals have bought land here and in Arizona to benefit from subsidized water.[200] This has produced criticism because the hay grown is exported to Saudi Arabia.[200] Around 15% of overall alfalfa production goes to exports.[201]

Water quality

[edit]

Agricultural impacts on water quality concentrate around concerns of the following contaminants: nutrients, pesticides, salts, pollutants, sediment, pathogens, and heavy metals.[202] These contaminants enter water bodies through above-ground surface runoff of rainwater or excess irrigation water, or percolating through the soil and leaching into groundwater. Water quality concerns affect most regions of the state and tend to be exacerbated during periods of drought.[203]

At present, all irrigated agricultural operations in the State are required to participate in the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.[204] The regulatory program began after the California Legislature passed Senate Bill 390 (SB390) in 1990, that eliminated a blanket waiver for agricultural operations to discharge wastewater without any specific environmental standards.[205]

Water supply

[edit]

A major source for Southern California's water supply, both agricultural and urban, is the Colorado River from which an aqueduct has been built to transport the water from the river to Riverside.[206] Colorado River irrigation is essential for agriculture to the Salton Sea Basin, which supports key agriculturally productive areas such as the Imperial Valley.[207] Another aspect of the agricultural water supply in California is the transfer of water that takes place from northern to southern California. In northern California, the Shasta Dam contains the flow of the Sacramento River, preserving water for California's use, and pumping stations in the California Delta extract water transferring that water across the San Joaquin Valley and southward.[208] A key component to the distribution of the water supply are the irrigation districts and water agencies who are responsible for delegating water as to meet the demand of those within the area as well as clarify and legal arbitration as to water rights.[209]

The agency tasked with overseeing the state's water supply and any projects associated with the upkeep of the supply is the California Department of Water Resources (CDWR).[210] As part of the 2019-2020 California Spending Plan, the CDWR received $2.336 billion with $833 million going towards projects overseen by the California Natural Resources Agency and $1.503 billion going towards the control board supervised by the California Environmental Protection Agency.[211] One of the CDWR's major projects is the State Water Project (SWP) which distributes 34% of the water that flows through its various channels.[212] The SWP also is one of the largest suppliers of hydroelectric power in the state.[212]

The invasive quagga- and zebra-​mussels reached the state in about 2006 and threaten the already limited supply of farm water.[213] The mussels have continued to spread and present an ever-expanding threat to pipelines.[214]

Air pollution

[edit]

In 2014, California agriculture soils contributed to 51% of statewide greenhouse gas emissions.[11] California's Mediterranean climate supports irrigation events such as nitrification which encourage nitrous oxide production. Mean nitrous oxide emissions (the biggest contributor to ozone depletion of all the major agricultural greenhouse gases) have been reported to be "four times higher in irrigated compared to rain-fed systems".[11] Another factor which frequently contributes to increased emissions are warm soil temperatures (a common occurrence in California).[11]

History

[edit]

Pre-1850

[edit]

Some California hunter-gatherer tribes, including the Owens Valley Paiute, developed irrigation.[215] Native Californians were skilled at gathering materials from plants at all times of the year, allowing the consistent gathering of materials from any and all local plants. Depending on when various plants—including succulents, flowers, and trees—bloomed or became ripe, different aspects of the plant could be accessed or harvested by Native California peoples.[216]

A basket cap made by the Karuk, Yurok, or Hupa peoples, using stems of plants that would have been harvested as a result of cultural burning.

Black oak acorn harvests were increased by cultural burning, which stimulated acorn growth and increased biodiversity in the area.[217] Cultural burning was commonly practiced by throughout California to maintain a healthy landscape that produced quality resources, as the Karuk, Yurok, Hupa peoples all regularly burned areas of bear grass and California hazelnut and to encourage the growth of stronger stems that could be used for basketry.[218][219]

In the late 1700s, Franciscan missionaries established Spanish missions in California. Like earlier Spanish missions established in Baja California, these missions were surrounded by agricultural land, growing crops from Europe and the Americas, and raising animals originating from Europe. Indigenous workers from Baja California made up a large part of the initial labor force on California missions.[220] In the early 1800s, this flow of laborers from Baja California had largely stopped, and the missions relied on converts from local tribes. By 1806, over 20,000 Mission Indians were "attached" to the California missions. As missions were expected to become largely self-sufficient, farming was a critically important Mission industry. George Vancouver visited Mission San Buenaventura in 1793 and noted the wide variety of crops grown: apples, pears, plums, figs, oranges, grapes, peaches, pomegranates, plantain, banana, coconut, sugar cane, indigo, various herbs, and prickly pear.[221] Livestock was raised for meat, wool, leather, and tallow, and for cultivating the land. In 1832, at the height of their prosperity, the missions collectively owned over 150,000 cattle and over 120,000 sheep. They also raised horses, goats, and pigs.[222]

The Spanish (1784–1810) and Mexican (1819–1846) governments made a large number of land grants to private individuals from 1785 to 1846. These ranchos included land taken from the missions following government-imposed secularization in 1833, after which the missions' productivity declined significantly. The ranchos were focused on cattle, and hides and tallow were their main products. There was no market for large quantities of beef (before refrigeration and railroads) until the California Gold Rush.

1850–1900

[edit]

Rapid population growth drove an increase in importation of agricultural products, and, within a few years, a massive growth in in-state agriculture. In the first years of the gold rush, the state relied on agricultural imports arriving by ship, from Australia, Chile, and Hawaii. During these years, there was rapid growth in vegetable farming for local markets. This was followed by an expansion of grain farming.[223] A shift in the economic dominance of grain farming over cattle raising was marked by the passage of the California "No-Fence Law" of 1874. This repealed the Trespass Act of 1850, which had required farmers to protect their planted fields from free-ranging cattle. The repeal of the Trespass Act required that ranchers fence stock in, rather than farmers fencing cattle out. The ranchers were faced with either the high expense of fencing large grazing tracts or selling their cattle at ruinous prices.[224][225]

Irrigation was almost nonexistent in California in 1850, but by 1899, 12 percent of the state's improved farmland was irrigated.[226]

Luther Burbank moved to Santa Rosa, California in 1875, and developed numerous commercially successful varieties of plants over the next 50 years.

1900–1950

[edit]

The 1902 Newlands Reclamation Act funded irrigation projects on arid lands in 20 states including California.

In 1905, the California legislature passed the University Farm Bill, which called for the establishment of a farm school for the University of California (at the time, Berkeley was the sole campus of the university).[227] The commission took a year to select a site for the campus, a tiny town then known as Davisville.[227] UC Davis opened its doors as the "University Farm" to 40 degree students (all male) from UC Berkeley in January 1909.

In 1919, the California Department of Food and Agriculture was established. The department covers state food safety, state protection from invasive species, and promoting the state's agricultural industry.

The Dust Bowl of the 1930s drove many people from the American prairie, and a significant number of these economic migrants relocated to California. Poor migrants from Oklahoma and nearby states were sometimes referred to as Okies, generally a pejorative term. In 1933, the state saw a number of agricultural labor strikes, with the largest actions against cotton growers. Cherry, grape, peach, pear, sugar beet, and tomato workers were also involved.

In 1942, the United States began the Bracero program. Lasting until 1964, this agreement established decent living conditions and a minimum wage for Mexican workers in the United States.

1950–2000

[edit]

In 1965, the Williamson Act became law, providing property tax relief to owners of California farmland and open-space land in exchange for agreement that the land will not be developed.

The 1960s and 1970s saw major farm worker strikes including the 1965 Delano grape strike and the 1970 Salad Bowl strike. In 1975, the California Agricultural Labor Relations Act of 1975 was enacted,[228] establishing the right to collective bargaining for farmworkers in California, a first in U.S. history.[229] Individuals with prominent roles in farm worker organizing in this period include Cesar Chavez, Dolores Huerta, Larry Itliong, and Philip Vera Cruz.

Through 1995 there were 50,000 Mixtecs every year in California agriculture.[230] They were about 70% of the 10,000 agricultural laborers in San Diego County, and had been spreading northwards to also work in Oxnard, Santa Maria and Madera County, and even into Oregon and Washington.[230] They were usually not the only indigenous Mexican ethnic groups – Zapotecs and Mayans were also usually working the same jobs.[230]

2001–present

[edit]

In the 2000s and 2010s, Californians voted for propositions which established new protections for farm animals. 2008 California Proposition 2 and 2018 California Proposition 12 both established minimum requirements for farming egg-laying hens, breeding pigs, and calves raised for veal. Few veal and pig factory farm operations exist in California, so these propositions mostly affect farmers who raise California's 15 million egg-laying hens.[231]

Agricultural crime

[edit]

California nut crimes have involved the theft of millions of dollars of nuts (almonds, pistachios, cashews and pecans) in multiple incidents since 2013.[232][233]

Water theft for agriculture has been an issue in times of drought, with the State assessing fines up to $1.5 million.[234][235]

Pests

[edit]

Despite its expansive geography, some pests are so severe, so polyphagous, and/or so wide-ranging as to be economically significant to the entire state.

In 2022, 181 million pounds of pesticide were applied in California, treating 92 million cumulative acres. The most used pesticides include sulfur, mineral oils, glyphosate, 1,3-dichloropropene, Lambda-cyhalothrin, Chloropicrin, and Abamectin.[236]

Larva/worm

The Navel orangeworm (Amyelois transitella) first entered from Arizona in 1942 and quickly began attacking walnut, date palm, and fig – despite its common name it is only a minor pest of citrus.[237] In the decades since it has become a notorious pest of almond, pistachio,[237][96] and pomegranate and remains problematic for walnut[96] and fig[96][97] as well.[96]

Adult

The light brown apple moth (Epiphyas postvittana, often abbreviated to LBAM) is a leafroller moth.[238] Despite its common name it is a pest of a wide range of crops, not just apples,.[238][239] The moth was confirmed to be present in California in 2007, and spraying programs in 2007–2008 lead to the Light brown apple moth controversy.[238][240]: 233  Tavener et al., 2011 finds novaluron works well but only when carried by horticultural mineral oil.[241]: 56 [242] Hosts include strawberry.[243]

Adult

Asian citrus psyllids (Diaphorina citri) are a major invasive threat to citrus.[46][47]

Just before dropping rodenticide into a field, Fresno County

Sellers et al. finds rodents and lagomorphs (jackrabbits, hares, other rabbits) do not seem to be a pest of walnut orchards here.[244] On the other hand, jackrabbits, cottontails, and brush rabbits are a problem for pistachios.[142] The lagomorph biocontrol myxoma virus is epidemiologically endemic in native lagomorphs.[245]

Oviposited olive
Dissected olive with larva
Adult

Olives throughout the state suffer from the introduced Olive Fruit Fly (Bactrocera oleae) here.[121] First detected outside its traditional Old World co-occurrence with the host tree in Los Angeles County in November 1998, it has since spread throughout California and into Baja and Sonora.[121][246]: 168  OFF is native to the Mediterranean basin and appears in some of the earliest written documents of human history, and is now found throughout much of the world.[247]

Particular strains of OFF are associated with particular varieties here.[247] Burrack & Zalom 2008 find females have strong oviposition preferences for particular varieties and their offspring show better life history performance on those preferred varieties.[247] The introduction here has spurred much parasitoid research, hoping to control them with biological controls.[247] Daane et al., 2008, Sime et al., 2006, Sime et al., 2007, Yokohama et al., 2006, and Yokohama et al., 2008 all were undertaken to serve this state's need for parasitoids.[247] Yokohama et al., 2008 achieves 60% control in cage trials using a Psyttalia cf. concolor.[247] Daane et al., 2008 finds P. lounsburyi is especially specific to OFF over other possible hosts, and its selectivity makes it an attractive option.[247] Daane et al. 2009 discloses an undescribed Pteromalus sp. nr. myopitae first found here.[247] Overall there is much concern about offtarget impacts if these were to be released.[247]

Adult Nasonovia ribisnigri

Aphid are common crop pests here. Nasonovia ribisnigri is one of the most common, especially for lettuce.[114]

Slates Hot Springs

Birds are often pests in fruit cultivation here, especially in cherries.[37][38] In cherry orchards the most common are crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos), crowned sparrows: (Zonotrichia spp.), European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris), house finches (Carpodacus mexicanus), house sparrows (Passer domesticus), scrub-jays (Aphelocoma californica), and Yellow-billed magpies (Pica nuttalli), but also in apple, blueberry, and grape, and the American Robin is a problem for some of these.[38]

Adult

The Glassy-Winged Sharpshooter (GWSS, Homalodisca vitripennis, syn. H. coagulata) is a vector of Pierce's Disease and other Xylella fastidiosa diseases here.[248][249][250][251] Probably present since the late 1980s, the GWSS was only confirmed here in 1994.[250] GWSS was not obviously a threat until August 1999 when it vectored PD to over 300 acres (120 ha) of vineyard in Temecula, Riverside County, forcing its destruction.[250] GWSS was first detected in Solano in November 2021, and although as of July 2022 absent from adjacent Napa is considered a high risk for introduction.[252] The staff of the Napa County Agriculture Commissioner does inspections of all material entering the county to prevent that from happening.[252] GWSS is such a problem in Fresno that there are permanent quarantine, monitoring, and eradication activities there.[253]

Adult

In 1997 the Blue-Green Sharpshooter (BGSS, Graphocephala atropunctata, the primary PD vector) arrived here and the two have combined badly ever since.[254] Besides vectoring PD they are also themselves a sucking pest and Hewitt et al., 1949 found they will often additionally go through reproduction on the vines.[255]

Adult

The European Grapevine Moth (Lobesia botrana, EGVM) was present from at least 2009 through 2014.[256] A 10 acres (4.0 ha) block in Napa suffered a 100% crop loss in 2009 due to a burrowing worm.[256] This was confirmed to be the EGVM by Gilligan et al., on September 30, 2009 (published in 2011).[256] (It is native to southern Italy and may have arrived elsewhere in the state, possibly being detected as early as 2007 by Mastro et al., and published in 2010).[256] Both USDA and CDFA impose quarantines if two moths are found within 3 miles (4.8 km) of each other within one lifecycle span.[256] At first the quarantine zone was 5 miles (8.0 km) around the detection sites.[256] In 2010, 40,000 traps revealed an expanded presence – in Fresno, Mendocino, Merced, Monterey, Napa, San Joaquin, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, and Sonoma.[256] The first detection in Sonoma was around Kenwood on March 29, 2010, then a total of 59 across the County that year.[256] In 2011 only nine were detected on two sites in Sonoma, and despite the quarantine the pest spread to Nevada County in 2011.[256] The quarantine was lifted in Fresno, Mendocino, Merced, and San Joaquin in February 2012, only one insect was found in Sonoma for the year, the quarantine was lifted in Nevada, Santa Clara, and Santa Cruz counties in December, and was greatly shrunk in Solano and Sonoma in the same month.[256] No detections occurred in Sonoma in 2013.[256] The quarantine was lifted in Solano in 2014 but one EGVM was found in Sonoma for the year and so the quarantine remained in Napa and Sonoma.[256] The last detection being in June 2014 in Sonoma, all USDA and state quarantine and trapping activities ended with the declaration in August 2016 of a successful eradication.[256]

Worm/larva

Carpenter Worm (Prionoxystus robiniae),[257] Darkling ground beetle (Blapstinus fuliginosus),[257] Dried fruit beetle (Carpophilus hemipterus),[257] Freeman sap beetle (Carpophilus freemani),[257] Confused sap beetle (Carpophilus mutilatus),[257] Fig beetle (Cotinis texana syn. C. mutabilis),[258] [257] Fig mite (Aceria fici),[257] Fig scale (Lepiosaphes conchiformis),[257] and Navel orangeworm[96][97][257] are among the most important pests of fig here.

Larva

Japanese Beetle (Popillia japonica) has been repeatedly found here and repeatedly eradicated.[259] Monitoring and eradication continue especially because of the wide host range of the grubs but also due to the grubs' and adults' destructiveness.[259]

The Plum Bud Gall Mite (Acalitus phloeocoptes (Nalepa)) was first confirmed here in Santa Clara County in February 2019,[260] but may have been found in northern Marin in early 2014.[145] Certainly since 2019 it has become widespread in the Bay Area, as of 2021 reaching Contra Costa, Alameda, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Sonoma, and north into Western Oregon.[145] So far PBGM is known to be a problem on plum and pluot and not on other stonefruits, especially not almond.[145]

Adult

The Silverleaf Whitefly (SLW, Bemisia tabaci strain B) was first noticed here in the fall of 1991.[261] First appearing in the valleys of the state's deserts, it has caused about $500 million in agricultural losses here through 2019.[261] Further economic effects include $774 million in lost sales, $112.5 million in lost personal income, and the loss of 12,540 jobs.[261] SLW is intractable in the southern deserts, especially in Imperial, Palo Verde, Coachella, and the southern part of San Joaquin vallies.[261] In the SJV this is worst on § Cotton.[261] Himler et al., 2011 find the Rickettsia sp. nr. bellii symbiont rapidly invaded the population of California, Arizona and New Mexico.[262]

Aleyrodes spiraeoides is a native whitefly.[263] Hosts include strawberry.[263]

Trialeurodes vaporariorum has recently invaded the Central Coast and Southern areas.[263] Hosts include strawberry.[263]

Trialeurodes packardi is a pest of strawberry whiteflies but less commonly than A. spiraeoides.[263]

Damage to collard greens, central Los Angeles

A Painted Bug, Bagrada hilaris was first detected here in 2008 in San Diego, Orange, Los Angeles, 2009 in Ventura, Riverside, and Imperial counties; 2010 in Kern, San Bernardino; no new discoveries here in 2011; 2012 in Santa Barbara & San Luis Obispo; 2013 in Monterey, Santa Cruz, San Benito, Fresno, Tulare, San Francisco; 2014 in Inyo, Kings, Merced, Stanislaus, Santa Clara, Alameda, San Mateo, and Yolo.[24] From here it has become an invasive pest of Brassicas throughout the southwest US, neighboring Coahuila, and the Big Island of Hawaii.[24] The most valuable crop threatened is § Broccoli.[24] Much of the research on this pest in this part of the world has been performed by the Palumbo group at the University of Arizona.[24]

In California

Lygus bugs are common pests here including the Western Tarnished Plant Bug (WTPB, Lygus hesperus).[264] A vacuum collector is often used for WTPB in strawberry, called the BugVac.[265]

In California

The Spotted Wing Drosophila (Drosophila suzukii) is a major insect pest of soft body fruits here,[266][267] especially grape,[268] strawberry,[269][270] tomato, cherry,[271][267] raspberry and other caneberries,[272] peach and nectarine,[267] fig,[267] and blueberry.[273] Ganaspis brasiliensis is a parasitoid which has been successful as a biocontrol here.[270]

D. simulans

Other Drosophila species include D. melanogaster and D. simulans which vector sour rot and bunch rot pathogens between grape bunches.[268] Hosts include grape[268] and strawberry.[274]

Turelli et al., 1991 uses a genetically modified Wolbachia to suppress D. simulans to suppress its vectored diseases here.[275] (This has become a widely known example of Wolbachia use, and has informed European decision making on vector control.)[275]

Caterpillar

The Salt Marsh Caterpillar (Estigmene acrea) is very common here, but usually causes no damage because they are a native pest with many natural enemies acting as biocontrols.[276][277] SMC can be significant in strawberry.[276][277]

Adult

The Peach Fruit Fly (Bactrocera zonata Saunders) has been repeatedly introduced and quickly eradicated here, in 1984[278] and in 2006.[279][190][191] Then on September 29 and/or 30, 2020, three PFF were found in Chowchilla, Madera County.[190][191] This presents a tremendous hazard not only to the area but to the state, and indeed the entire country.[190][191] Because the pest may spread from here to other countries, trading partners including the European Union and New Zealand are also concerned.[190][191] They are considering restricting importation of fruits and vegetables from the state.[191] As a result, the Secretary of CDFA, Karen Ross has declared a biosecurity emergency and eradication efforts using methyl eugenol lures are underway.[190][191] Especially an immediate concern are California's $2.10b citrus-, $875m stonefruit-, and $1.19b tomato industries.[190][191]

Adult

The Green Fruit Beetle (Figeater Beetle, Cotinis mutabilis) is occasionally a pest of ripened fruit, including apricot, caneberry, fig, grape, peach, and plum.[280] The larvae/grubs are harmless however.[280]

Adult

For Beet Armyworms (BAW, Spodoptera exigua) in strawberry[281] and lettuce[115] S. exigua populations here have long standing carbamate resistance.[282]

Adults

First identified here in 1992 in La Mesa, San Diego County by Haagsma et al.,[283] the Formosan Termite (Coptotermes formosanus) has been here since at least 10 years prior.[284] As with every other infestation anywhere in the world, it has never been eradicated, and is still present at the original La Mesa site.[284] In the time since there have been new infestations – mostly suspected to be independent introductions – in Canyon Lake, Riverside County in 2020, Rancho Santa Fe, San Diego County in 2021, Highland Park, Los Angeles County in 2021.[285][286] The Formosan Termite is a pest of sugarcane, and citrus, but it is most often a structural pest.[287]

Adult

Cucumber Beetles (Diabrotica balteata, Acalymma vittatum, D. undecimpunctata) are common pests here.[14] UC IPM provides recommended practices for apricot,[14]

Galls

Phylloxera of Grape (Daktulosphaira vitifoliae) is a perennial aphid problem here.[288]: 24–25  The industry suffered a wipeout in the 1980s due to overreliance on one, non-resistant rootstock.[288]: 24–25  Islam et al., 2013 explains some of the genetic diversity of the population here by sexual reproduction, but their sampling leaves open other possibilities for the remainder.[289] They also find two major subpopulations differentiated by rootstock association: AxR1 associated and those associated with all others.[289]

Larva

The detection of the Red Palm Weevil (Rhynchophorus ferrugineus) in 2010 was very concerning to this valuable industry.[94][95] It most likely arrived with in live palms which are commonly sold internationally.[95] The adults flew up to 900 metres (2,953 ft; 984 yd) in a day, and over 3 to 5 days that allowed dispersal up to 7 kilometres (4.3 mi).[95] A tremendous effort was made to trap and eradicate,[94] UCR's Center for Invasive Species Research recommended mostly insecticides, and quick destruction of any palms found to be infested. Pheromone attractant traps were very effective.[95] The California Fan Palm (Washingtonia filifera) and the European Fan Palm (Chamaerops humilis) seemed to be resistant.[95] The last sighting was on January 18, 2012.[94] Three years later on January 20, 2015, USDA's APHIS declared the eradication successful.[94] Its relative the South American palm weevil (R. palmarum) has killed increasing numbers of Canary Island date palms (Phoenix canariensis) and is expected to become a significant pest of dates in the future.[94]

Orange

Several Culex mosquitoes are common here including C. quinquefasciatus, C. stigmatosoma, and C. tarsalis.[181] Insecticides are often used in their control[290] and as a result some species have undergone resistance evolution.[290] Mouches et al., 1986 finds one population achieved this via gene amplification of an esterase.[290][291]

Adults

The southern part of the state suffers from the Walnut Aphid (Spotted Alfalfa Aphid, Therioaphis trifolii).[292] Stern & Reynolds 1958 finds that from the beginning of the 1950s to the end of the decade severe parathion resistance had rapidly developed there.[292]

Los Angeles

The common House Fly (Musca domestica) is economically significant in poultry production worldwide, including in California.[292] From 1964 to 1969 Georghiou & Hawley 1972 finds rapid evolution of organophosphate resistance in a poultry facility in Moorpark.[292] The most common permethrin kdr allele here is kdr-his, although kdr and super-kdr are also present.[293] (This profile is also found in New Mexican, Floridian, North Carolinian, New York, and Montanan populations.)[293]

The Mexfly (Mexican fruit fly, Anastrepha ludens) has repeatedly invaded the southern part of the state.[294]: 16  Sterile insect technique (SIT) has been used to great success to eradicate them every time, both here and in Texas.[294]: 16 

The Medfly (Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata) has also been controlled with SIT both here and in Florida, although before 1980 both states used malathion baits.[294]: 18  Eradication by SIT was accomplished with the help of the Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture program, a joint effort of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and the International Atomic Energy Agency (FAO-IAEA).[295]: 30  Studies of the Medfly invasion here show that there have been many almost-invasions at the state's airports and other ports, most of which have failed to establish[296] including a small infestation in 1975 in Los Angeles which was eradicated using SIT.[246]: 174  This has informed quarantine and invasion biology efforts and studies on the Medfly around the world.[296]

Tetranychus is a genus of spider mites.[64]: 18  Three species are common on cotton here[64]: 18  including the Pacific Spider Mite (Tetranychus pacificus) and the Two-Spotted Spider Mite (T. urticae).[297][64]: 18  and they are hard to distinguish because they are sympatric.[64]: 18  Distinguishing them is nonetheless necessary, because they differ widely in insecticide resistance, with the PSM the worst.[64]: 18  The PSM and 2SSM are also significant in peach here.[298] Two-Spotted Spider Mite is also a major pest of strawberry,[299]

Cotton Aphids (Aphis gossypii, Melon Aphid) afflict cotton and melon crops here.[300] Insecticides are commonly used, and this has produced resistance and may also contaminate their honeydew.[300] Insecticide contaminated honeydew may harm beneficial insects.[300]

The Avocado Thrips (Scirtothrips perseae) and Persea Mite (Oligonychus perseae) are two invasive pests here.[19]

The Tobacco Budworm (Chloridea virescens, Heliothis virescens) is common on cotton in the Imperial Valley.[64]: 80  At least by 1985 C. virescens had developed permethrin resistance.[64]: 80  Nicholson & Miller 1985 find severe metabolic resistance to permethrin in Imperial Valley populations.[64]: 80 

Western Flower Thrips (Frankliniella occidentalis) is a major pest of horticulturals around the world.[301] Here, it is especially known as a pest of peach[298] and strawberry.[302][301]

The Diamondback Moth (Plutella xylostella) is a common insect pest here.[303] Btk (Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki) is a commonly used insectide for Diamondback Moth control in California.[303] Shelton et al., 2000 finds a high degree of natural genetic variation in Btk resistance in the state's DM population.[303]

Several Aedes spp. are present.[304] A. aegypti is found as an exotic pest here.[305] Gloria-Soria et al., 2016 finds a significant amount of shared genetics between the population of the southern part of the state and New Mexico, Arizona, and Mexico.[305]

Procambarus clarkii is an invasive crayfish across the Western US.[306] It was first imported to a frog farm in San Diego County in 1932, and proved so successful as feed and food that descendants were sold around the state.[306] They escaped and now are a widespread nuisance.[306]

Lymantria dispar (spongy moth, gypsy moth) is an established pest here.[307] Epanchin-Niell et al., 2012 find that annual surveillance costs can be easily reduced.[307] Costs are reduced by 50% by targeting surveillance resources based on the difference in surveillance cost by location, and by the difference in establishment risk by location.[307][308]

California red scale (Aonidiella aurantii) is an invasive pest here.[309] It competitively displaced a prior invader Yellow scale (A. citrina).[309] Debach et al., 1978 finds that A. citrina is now extinct in this state due to the invasion of A. aurantii.[309]

The Black Vine Weevil (Otiorhynchus sulcatus) is mostly found in the Central Coast AVA but does rarely occur elsewhere.[310] Hosts include grape[310] and strawberry.[311] Creeping red fescue (Festuca rubra) is an alternate host.[310]

Otiorhynchus cribricollis (Cribrate weevil) is common in the San Joaquin Valley.[311] It is sometimes a problem in strawberry in the area.[311]

Helicoverpa zea (syn. Heliothis zea) is common in several parts of the state including all strawberry growing areas.[312] H. zea is especially troublesome in southern coastal California.[312]

Cyclamen Mites occur natively here.[313] Hosts include strawberry.[313]

Scutigerella immaculata is an introduced pest restricted to high moisture soil.[314] Hosts include strawberry.[314]

Some slugs (Gastropoda spp.) are vegetable and fruit pests here.[315] Several are introduced pests from Europe.[315] Hosts include strawberry.[315]

European Earwigs are most destructive from April to July here.[316] Hosts include strawberry.[316]

Eotetranychus lewisi is found in coastal areas including Oxnard and Salinas.[317] Hosts include strawberry.[317]

Agrotis ipsilon is the most common cutworm here.[318] Hosts include strawberry.[318]

Pandemis pyrusana is present and eats the leaves of several crops.[243] Hosts include strawberry.[243]

Clepsis peritana is an ecologically important saprovore.[243] Later in the season it is a pest of strawberry.[243]

Myzus persicae is present.[319] Hosts include strawberry.[319]

Macrosiphum euphorbiae is much larger than other aphids in California.[319] Populations here have two forms, a green and a red.[319] Hosts include strawberry.[319]

Aedes albopictus is a pest of livestock concern.[320] Modified Wolbachia have been released to control this species here.[320]

El-Lissy, eradication ceremony

The Pink Bollworm (Pectinophora gossypiella) was devastating[321] to cotton growers here and throughout the southwest.[48] Chu et al., 1996 reports a management program in the Imperial Valley in which government imposed practices successfully reduced populations.[48]

Weeds

[edit]

Rejmanek & Pitcairn 2002 overview 53 weed eradication campaigns in the state, and find that any infestation smaller than 2.5 acres (1.0 ha) was usually successfully eradicated, while anything which had already reached 2,500 acres (1,000 ha) was essentially impossible to do.[322]: 137 

Yellow Sweetclover (Melilotus officinalis L. Lam.), Chickweed (Stellaria spp.), Annual Bluegrass (Poa annua Linnaeus), Shepherd's Purse (Capsella bursa-pastoris Linnaeus Medikus), Crabgrass (various Digitaria spp.), Spotted Spurge (Euphorbia maculata Linnaeus Small), and Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) are common weeds here, including in strawberry and parsley.[125] (See § Strawberries, and § Parsley.)

Marestail (Horseweed, Conyza canadensis, Erigeron canadensis) is a common native weed here.[323] Glyphosate-resistant marestail first appeared in the state in the Central Valley in 2005 and this resistance spread unusually rapidly through the southern Valley thereafter.[323] Okada et al., 2013 finds several independent evolutionary events, and that these unrelated resistance alleles may have been passed along so quickly because C. canadensis can reproduce by selfing.[323][48] Hairy Fleabane (Conyza bonariensis, Erigeron bonariensis) is one of the major § Weeds in peach here.[298] The Okada group also studies glyphosate-resistant Hairy Fleabane.[324] (See also § Glyphosate.)

In the Central Valley the most common weeds are cool-season grass weeds (Poaceae), thistles (Asteraceae), mustards (Brassicaceae), fiddleneck (Boraginaceae), warm-season grass weeds, warm-season Cyperaceae, amaranths (Amaranthaceae), morning glory (Convolvulaceae), and caltrop (Tribulus terrestris, Zygophyllaceae).[325] Achmon et al., 2018 dramatically lowered seed bank viability, biomass, and density of all these weeds, and improved tomato yield using biosolarization using tomato and grape crop waste.[325]

Cape-ivy (Delairea odorata) is an invasive weed originally from the Drakensberg Mountains in South Africa and Swaziland.[326] It was first observed here in 1892 and has since spread to every coast of the state, and into one coastal county of Oregon.[326] Two organisms have been found in its native range which could be introduced here as controls, see § Digitivalva delaireae and § Cercospora delaireae.[326]

Sea Beet (Beta vulgaris subsp. maritima) and Beta macrocarpa are introduced weeds here.[327][328] The allozyme analysis of Bartsch & Ellstrand 1999 shows free gene flow between these two and cultivated beet.[327] Wild beet is only significant in small grains in Imperial, where dicamba and 2,4-D are necessary.[329] See also § Small grains.

Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) was first discovered in San Diego County by Sereno Watson in 1876.[330] It has since spread elsewhere, developed the worst multiresistance in the world, and become one of the most notorious crop weeds in the world.[330] In California it is found in all but the northernmost counties.[331]

California wild radish (radish (Raphanus sativus) × Jointed charlock (R. raphanistrum))[332] has replaced all of its ancestral populations in the state.[328]

Di Tomaso and Healy 2007 find Chenopodium album requires years of continuous management for any significant seedbank reduction.[5]

Pathogens

[edit]

Xylella fastidiosa

[edit]

X. fastidiosa was first discovered here by Newton B. Pierce (1856–1916) in 1892.[333][334] It has ever since remained a constant pathogen of many crops here,[335] including grape, almond, citrus, and oleander.[119]

Pierce's Disease

[edit]

The CDFA's Pierce's Disease Control Program coordinates response and research in the state.[336] Alston et al., 2013 estimates that PD cost the state $92m in 2013[337] and over Tumber et al., 2014 estimates $104m annually in 2014.[254] Burbank estimates the cost to be $100m annually by 2022.[338]

GWSS remains a common vector of PD and as such is a severe drag on the entire continent's wine grape and table grape pricing and supply.[249] In the Napa- and Sonoma- Valleys and other such costal AVAs PD mostly occurs in hotspots adjacent to small water flows.[255] These areas are defined by small streams and ornamental irrigation.[255] These are favorable habitat for the BGSS.[255] Lin et al., 2005 provides SSRs for differentiating between the state's various strains infecting grape and other crops[119] and Lin et al., 2013 for grape-infecting strains here and in Texas.[333]

The BGSS is known to thrive in higher temperatures and PD epidemics are more severe in hotter years, and there is evidence that global warming is increasing BGSS transmission of PD here.[339] Larger data sets are needed for stronger confirmation.[339]

There are two major divisions here, a lineage from Bakersfield and Santa Barbara and another from Temecula and the north.[340] Within the northern areas there is lower gene flow, probably due to the Mayacamas Mountains.[340]

Zhang et al., 2011 compares a PD strain to EB92-1 and finds that they are surprisingly similar.[341] EB92-1 is a biocontrol strain discovered by Hopkins in 1992 and published as Hopkins 2005.[341] It is originally from elderberry (Sambucus spp.) and is highly persistent on grapevine but is asymptomatic.[341] Zhang finds that the EB92-1 genome is a proper subset of the Temecula1 genome, lacking 11 missing genes, 10 of which are predicted to be pathogenicity factors.[341]

Vanhove et al., 2020 elucidates the current genetic situation of PD strains here, including population structure and their evolution.[342]

Xf in stonefruit

[edit]

Xf is also significant in stonefruit here, causing Almond leaf scorch disease and other diseases.[335][333] Xf isolates CFBP8071 and M23 are common on almond here.[335] Moralejo et al., 2019 shed some light on the European invasion of this pathogen.[335] Their analysis shows these isolates have a 99.4% nucleotide identity with those on grape in the introduced range – and more generally, these isolates, a European cherry infection, and PD isolates from both areas have a high degree of relatedness.[335] Chen et al., 2005 provides PCR primers, Lin et al., 2015 Simple Sequence Repeats (SSRs), and Chen et al., 2010 the first genome sequence for common almond-infecting strains here.[333] Lin et al., 2005 provides SSRs for differentiating strains from almond from various other strains.[119] While almond and plum develop leaf scorch, Ledbetter & Rogers 2009 find that peach does not.[333]

Besides Pierce's Disease, the glassy-winged sharpshooter also vectors Xf among stonefruit and so its arrival threatens the world's almond supply.[249]

Xf of citrus

[edit]

Lin et al., 2005 provides Simple Sequence Repeats (SSRs) which distinguish California's Citrus Variegated Chlorosis strains from almond, oleander, and PD strains.[119]

Other Xf infections

[edit]

Xf has many other hosts. Chitalpa tashkentensis is a common landscaping plant here and elsewhere in the southwest that is also a host.[333] Randall et al., 2009 propose the subspecies tashke for these strains but it remains unclear whether this is a distinct subspecies and whether it endures in the overall evolutionary course of Xf strains.[333] Hernandez-Martinez et al., 2007 find the subspecies sandyi causes disease of Oleander, Jacaranda spp., daylily, and magnolia.[333]

Raju 1983 finds Xf without symptoms on wild Carneocephala fulgida, Draeculacephala minerva, the Blue-Green Sharpshooter (BGSS, Graphocephala atropunctata, a vector), Helochara delta, Pagaronia tredecimpunctata, and Philaenus spumarius.[333] Purcell & Saunders 1999 find infections in plants common to riparian zones here often are not motile in the host and spontaneously improve.[333]

Botrytis cinerea

[edit]
Botrytis cinerea of strawberry
Botrytis cinerea on grape, Sonoma County

Various strains of gray mold (Botrytis cinerea) are a constant presence in the state's horticulture, especially afflicting strawberry[343] and grape.[344]

Fungicides are used multiple times per seasons and as a result resistance to almost every mode of action[345] is common.[343] Cosseboom et al., 2019 finds the proportion of resistant isolates increased within a single season in conventional but not organic.[343] This shows that evolution is driven by usage in this crop.[343]

Alleles responsible include the erg27 alleles F196C, F412I, and F412S; bos1 alleles I356N, I365N, and I365S; the β-tubulin allele E198A (which Hu et al. 2016 finds has no fitness penalty); the cytb allele G143A (found by Veloukas et al., 2014 to have no fitness penalty); the mrr1 allele R351C and the mrr1 deletion event ΔL497 (also known as MDR1h and found only in Botrytis group S); and sdhB alleles H272R, H272Y, N230I, and P225F (the only one conferring resistance to isofetamid, also confers other resistanceto penthiopyrad, to fluopyram, and to boscalid – and associated by Hu et al., 2016 with resistance to fluxapyroxad).[343] The analysis of Cosseboom et al., 2019 explains 93.8% of resistance by already-known alleles discovered by Banno et al., 2008, Ma et al., 2007, Grabke et al., 2013, Kretschmer et al., 2009, Dowling et al., 2017, Fernández-Ortuño et al., 2012, Amiri et al., 2014, and Yin et al., 2011, so very little is due to experimental error, unknown physiological effects, or undiscovered alleles.[343]

Organic strawberry ranches experience very active genetic transfer with conventional strawberry and as a result they have high proportions of resistance.[343] Cosseboom et al., 2019 finds that conventional fields undergo within-season resistance evolution, while organic does not, demonstrating that they are indeed not using the fungicides they claim to not use, and that genetic transfer is not so rapid as to change the situation in a field that quickly.[343]

Ma & Michailides 2005 developed a microsatellite primed PCR (MP-PCR) for genetic diversity in this fungus, especially for populations in this state.[346] Strawberry Botrytis leaf spot was first discovered in 2018 in Santa Maria and reported by Mansouripour & Holmes 2020.[347] Bc was not previously known to produce a leaf spot phenotype in strawberry.[347]

In table grape there is a limit of 0.5% – table grapes can only be shipped if an allotment contains 0.5% or less of Bc-infected berries.[344] Ozone is one treatment option for grape.[344]

Shao et al., 2021 find azoxystrobin resistance is very common in this population.[348] They find it is much more common than in China where azoxystrobin is almost unknown.[348]

B. cinerea is a common cause of postharvest losses in this industry.[349] Due to the need for long shelf life in the California industry – because target markets include the whole continent – and the low moisture growing environments, Petrasch et al., 2021 find genomic selection for strawberry resistance is highly successful.[349] In other environments and markets however this is not expected to be as simple.[349]

Most B. cinerea inoculum is introduced via aeroplankton.[350] Significant protection against this is afforded by polytunnels.[350] Daugovish & Larson 2009 find 84%–90% greater yield and 62%–140% greater marketable yield resulting in $14,000–$18,500 per hectare ($5,700–$7,500/acre) greater revenue due to polytunnels.[350]

Though gray mold elsewhere may be caused by both B. cinerea and B. pseudocinerea in California B. pseudocinerea is unknown on strawberry.[351] However it is found on blueberry in the San Joaquin Valley.[351]

Other pathogens of grape

[edit]

Red Blotch Disease (caused by grapevine red blotch virus, GLRaV-3[citation needed]) costs the state $90 million annually.[337] Losses in Napa County cost over $69,500 per hectare ($28,100/acre) across the likely 25-year lifetime of a vineyard, far higher than the $2,200 per hectare ($890/acre) estimated for eastern Washington.[337]

Al Rwahnih et al., 2013 discovered Grapevine Red Blotch-associated Virus (GRBaV) here, a DNA virus of this crop.[352][353]

Leafroll Disease (grapevine leafroll-associated virus 3) is also economically significant.[337]

The seriousness of Powdery Mildew (Uncinula necator) has been recognized since at least 1859 in the northern grape district.[354] Newton B. Pierce was working in the area a few decades before his discovery of Pierce's Disease, and over the 1860s he watched U. necator spread to the south.[354] Frederic Bioletti called it the only serious fungal disease the industry suffered from, and so it has remained ever since.[354][355] The first case of U. necator demethylation inhibitor resistance (DMI resistance) was found in this state in 1980.[356] This was only confirmed with Gubler et al., 1996's reanalysis of 1986 and 1990 samples however.[356] Gubler finds that reduced rates prescribed by IPM are responsible for some of U. necator's triadimefon-, myclobutanil-, and fenarimol resistances.[133][357][356]

Phomopsis dieback (caused by Phomopsis viticola) is also a major trunk disease here.[353] It is endemic to California.[353]

Fusarium spp.

[edit]

Fusarium is a genus of many species which are ubiquitous around the world, including here.

Fusarium Wilt of Strawberry (Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. fragariae) had only been seen once before, in Queensland, in one sample of Winks & Williams in 1966,[358] until appearing again here in 2006 and identified by Koike et al. 2009.[359] As of 2018 it has spread throughout the state.[360] Henry et al., 2017 apply a Japanese PCR-based test of nuclear ribosomal intergenic spacer and elongation factor 1-α.[361] They find such high similarity between the intended – Japanese – target populations and California populations that there are almost no false negatives.[361] There are no false positives on other Fo types (i.e. those not pathogenic on strawberry).[361] Although this suggests both populations have a common origin, that remains to be proven. The matching IGS and EF-1α sequences divide into three somatic compatibility groups.[361] The vast majority fell into what they term SCG1, with a few of SCG2 and SCG3.[361] SCG2 is always a false negative with this test which may indicate the entire group lacks the sequence in question.[361] Although this proves to be a good test, a universally valid test may require finding a sequence specifically pertinent to virulence on the host and not other, incidental sequences.[361]

In early 2012 a previously unknown plant disease (an unidentified Fusarium) and vector (a Euwallacea, preliminarily termed the polyphagous shot hole borer, PSHB) were detected in Los Angeles and Orange Counties.[18] This is especially a disease affecting avocado growers, but also other crops in this state and in its other invasive range, in Israel.[18] In fact although PSHB was noticed on a black locust here in 2003, the associated Fusarium was only detected in 2012 on home avocado trees in LA County.[18] As all Euwallacea in both their native and invasive ranges, this insect prefers to infest hosts in this area in locations which are stressful due to their unnaturalness, such as urban ornamental plantings and orchards.[18]

Fusarium Wilt of Lettuce (Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lactucum) is common in the state.[362]

Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. vasinfectum is a disease of § Cotton.[363] Kim et al., 2005 finds races 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8 are present.[363] They find race 4 arrived from India in 2003.[363] Race 4 is so common here that varieties are screened for resistance before development or deployment.[364] Unlike other strains it does not require a vector, a root-knot nematode.[365] Race 4 isolates here are more pathogenic on Gossypium barbadense than on G. hirsutum.[366]

Alternaria spp.

[edit]

Various Alternaria spp. are significant fungal diseases here and often receive strobilurin, iprodione, azoxystrobin, and tebuconazole treatments.[143] The Ma & Michaelides group has done extensive work on fungicide resistance, including in these pathogens.[143] They have characterized resistance alleles (and in some cases produced molecular diagnostics methologies) for strobilurin-resistant-, iprodione-resistant-, and azoxystrobin-resistant- isolates.[143]

A. alternata has one of the widest host ranges of any fungal crop pathogen and so fungicides are commonly used.[367] Almost all fruiting production of vulnerable crops must be fungicide-treated.[367] Avenot, along with the Michailides group has found extensive boscalid resistance in a swathe from the center down into the central southern part of the state, especially Kern, Tulare, Fresno, and Madera.[368][367] Although it is also commonly applied in Kings, no resistance is known there.[367]

Black Heart is a common pomegranate disease worldwide. Out of the group of causative species, here Luo et al., 2017 find it is caused by A. alternata and A. arborescens.[45]: 192 [369] Michailides et al., 2008 finds the 'Wonderful' cultivar can suffer at a rate of 10% or more here.[45]: 192 [370]: S105 

Alternaria Rot of Fig is common here. It is caused by various species of this genus and relatives including: Ulocladium atrum, A. alternata, rarely other Alternaria spp., Dendryphiella vinosa, and Curvularia spp. Epicoccum purpurascens causes Alternaria of breba only.[371] (The first, "breba" crop is not eaten but must be removed because it harbors inoculum of all of these microbes for the second, real crop.)[371]

Candidatus Phytoplasma

[edit]

The Peach Yellow Leaf Roll phytoplasma (Candidatus Phytoplasma pyri) was first found here in the Sacramento Valley in 1948.[372] The same pathogen may be the cause of Almond Brown Line and Decline.[372]

Other pathogens

[edit]

Phytophthora cactorum causes Strawberry crown rot, a common disease here.[373]

The Foliar Nematode (Aphelenchoides fragariae) and Northern Root Knot Nematode (Meloidogyne hapla) are the two most common strawberry nematode diseases here,[374] although RKN is rarely seen by CalPoly Strawberry Center's diagnostic lab.[375] Even rarer are the Root Lesion (Pratylenchus penetrans), Stem (Ditylenchus dipsaci), Dagger (Xiphinema americanum), Needle (Longidorus elongatus), Foliar (Aphelenchoides ritzemabosi and A. besseyi), and other Root Knot (Meloidogyne incognita and M. javanica) nematodes.[374]

Anthracnose occurs on peach, almond, and strawberry here.[376] Colletotrichum acutatum – a soilborne pathogen[377] – is a common cause.[376] Natamycin is often used in strawberry.[376] Adaskaveg & Hartin 1997 identify the C. acutatum strains most frequently responsible in peach and almond.[376]

Monilinia fructicola and M. laxa are significant diseases of stonefruits here and benzimidazole is often used.[143] The Ma & Michaelides group has done extensive work on fungicide resistance in these microorganisms.[143]

Botryosphaeria dothidea is a significant fungal diseases here which often receives strobilurin, iprodione, azoxystrobin, and tebuconazole treatments.[143] The Ma & Michaelides group has done extensive work on fungicide resistance, including in this pathogen.[143] They have characterized resistance alleles of tebuconazole-resistant- isolates.[143]

Figs commonly suffer from Fig Smut here.[371] Smut is caused by various Aspergillus spp. and relatives, including: Aspergillus niger, A. japonicus, A. carbonarius, A. flavus and A. parasiticus, Eurotium spp., A. tamarii, A. terreus, A. wentii, A. alliaceus, A. melleus, A. ochraceus, Emericella spp., A. carneus, A. fumigatus, A. sclerotiorum, and A. sydowii.[371]

Olives here suffer from a wide range of fungal diseases of the Botryosphaeriaceae family, as elsewhere in the world.[122] Úrbez-Torres et al., 2013 finds Neofusicoccum mediterraneum and Diplodia mutila are the most virulent of them on Manzanillo and Sevillano.[122] Moral et al., 2010 finds N. mediterraneum commonly causes a branch blight on several cultivars and D. seriata causes a branch canker.[122] More specific controls than currently available are needed for N. mediterraneum in highly susceptible cultivars, and early harvest may be the only successful treatment for D. seriata.[122]

Avian malaria is present in the state.[182][181] Plasmodium relictum and its vectors C. quinquefasciatus, C. stigmatosoma, and C. tarsalis are most commonly responsible.[181]

Stripe Rust (Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici, Pst) is found on Barley, wheat, and various grasses here.[20]: 9  Maccaferri et al. 2015 surveys the world's wheat and finds the Davis Pst populations are unusually heterogenous.[378] That makes the Davis environment a useful experimental location for differentiating wheat genetic resistance.[378]

Stromatinia cepivora (garlic white rot) was identified in the San Francisco area in the 1930s and Gilroy in the 1940s.[379] It continues to be a problem for garlic growers in the state.[380]

Leaf Spot of Caneberry (Mycosphaerella rubi, anamorph Septoria rubi) is common here.[26] It is common on caneberry excluding raspberry, so erect and trailing blackberry, dewberry, olallieberry, and boysenberry.[26] Treatment is simple, almost entirely relying on increased air circulation.[26] No fungicides are registered but any fungicides for § Anthracnose and § Gray mold will work.[26] Copper and lime sulfur work to some degree.[26]

This should be distinguished from Leaf Spot of Raspberry (Sphaerulina rubi, anamorph Cylindrosporium rubi).[26] Although Leaf Spot of Raspberry is found here it is not common in California.[26]

Verticillium Wilts (biovars of Verticillium dahliae) are found here as in any other ecozone. This includes Verticillium Wilt of Strawberry.[381] Unlike every other known Vert Wilt of any other crop, this syndrome sometimes lacks any or any noticeable vascular discoloration of the crown.[382] In strawberry, methyl bromide has historically been vital to prevention, and with phase out, this disease is of increasing concern.[381][383] In all cases some fumigation is necessary, and if fumigation is not possible then solarization and/or rotation are the only remaining options.[381] Although drip fumigation (fumigation inline in the drip tape) is possible it does not produce the same results, especially failing to reach the shoulders of the beds.[381] Nurseries universally use MB or MB + chloropicrin, while growers may use 1,3-D + chloropicrin, chloropicrin alone, metam sodium, or metam potassium.[381] Note that MB+chloropicrin also provides an uncharacterized growth promoter effect in this crop.[383]: 180 

Strawberry Crinkle Virus (SCV, Strawberry crinkle cytorhabdovirus) is common here.[384][385][386] Much of the fundamental research into SCV has been performed by a lab at UC Berkeley, including research on mechanical transmission.[384][385]

Frequent use has produced streptomycin resistance in Fire Blight (Erwinia amylovora) here,[387] first found in the state's pear isolates by Miller & Schroth 1972.[134] This disease is a problem of pomes, including pear.[387]

Podosphaera aphanis is the cause of powdery mildew of strawberry.[388] It has evolved strong resistance here.[388] Palmer & Holmes 2021 find resistance to the majority of the most commonly applied ingredients in the Oxnard population.[388]

Armillaria Root Rot of peach is primarily caused by Armillaria mellea and A. solidipes here.[389] A. gallica and A. mexicana are not thought to be common here, but are common in Mexico.[389]

Tomato infectious chlorosis virus afflicts tomato here.[390]: 180 

16SrIII-A is a phytoplasma of apricot here.[391] Uyemoto et al., 1991 found it on apricot in California.[391]

Downy Mildew of Lettuce (Bremia lactucae) is common on lettuce here.[392]: 156  The population in the country, and especially in this state, is unusual however: It is highly clonal.[392]: 156  As a result, Brown et al., 2004 finds all isolates have the same metalaxyl resistance.[392]: 156 

Kim et al., 2015 finds Penicillium digitatum isolates from citrus here have developed fludioxonil resistance,[393] Thiabendazole (TBZ) is also commonly used in citrus here.[394] Schmidt et al., 2006 find point mutations at codon 200 conferring TBZ resistance are common in California.[394]

Karnal Bunt (Tilletia indica, syn. Neovossia indica) has spread from Asia to this continent, and since 1996 has been found in this country.[395]: 592  It is present in areas of this state, and Arizona and Texas.[395]: 592 

Corn Stunt Disease (Spiroplasma kunkelii) affects corn (maize, Zea mays) here.[396]

Sudden Oak Death (Phytophthora ramorum) is a widespread disease of oaks here and in Oregon, and is also found in Europe.[117] It was first discovered in the 1990s on the Central Coast[397] and was quickly found in Oregon as well.[398] P. ramorum is of economic concern due to its infestation of Rubus and Vaccinium spp.[398] All isolates here and throughout North America have been of the A2 mating type and genetic analysis suggests that although it was discovered here, the pathogen originated elsewhere.[398]

Phytophthora fragariae is a common disease of strawberry here.[399] Weg 1997 shows that the resistance gene Rpf1 is in a gene-for-gene relationship.[399] Mathey 2013 shows that Rpf1 is responsible for most resistance in the Watsonville and Oxnard environments and provides a DNA test to predict performance.[399] No tests are available for Phytophthora fragariae var. fragariae.[386] FPS recommends diagnosis by visual inspection.[386]

Apple mosaic virus, Arabis mosaic virus and Tomato ringspot virus are common pathogens in strawberry.[400]

Raspberry ringspot virus is a common pathogen in California.[386] Diagnosis is performed by cross infection of one of the alternate hosts which are herbaceous.[386]

Strawberry feather leaf virus is a common pathogen.[386] Foundation Plant Services (FPS) offers testing via leaf graft.[401]

Hosts of Strawberry latent C virus include strawberry.[386]

Strawberry latent ringspot virus is diagnosed by cross infection of one of the alternate hosts which are herbaceous or by polymerase chain reaction (PCR).[386]

Strawberry leaf roll disease is a common pathogen.[386]

Strawberry mild yellow edge virus is diagnosed by cross infection of a test strawberry or by polymerase chain reaction (PCR).[386]

Hosts of Strawberry mottle virus include strawberry.[386]

Strawberry pallidosis associated virus is diagnosed by cross infection of a test strawberry or by polymerase chain reaction (PCR).[386] It is one of several viuses causing Pallidosis Related Decline of Strawberry.[402]: 68 

Diagnosis of Strawberry vein banding virus is performed by cross infection of an herbaceous alternate host or by PCR.[386]

Tobacco necrosis virus is diagnosed by cross infection of an herbaceous alternate host.[386] Biosecurity Australia considers its presence here cause for concern for Australian stonefruit growers.[403]

Hosts of Tobacco streak virus include strawberry.[386]

Diagnosis of Tomato black ring virus is performed by cross infection of an herbaceous alternate host.[386]

Tomato bushy stunt virus is a common pathogen of several horticultural crops here.[386]

Tomato ringspot virus is diagnosed by cross infection of an herbaceous alternate host.[386] Hosts include strawberry.[404]

Hosts of Xanthomonas fragariae include strawberry.[386]

Aphelenchoides besseyi is a common horticultural nematode disease in California.[386]

Barley/Cereal yellow dwarf virus (B/CYDV) harms native bunchgrasses more than an invasive grass, aiding the invasion.[405]

Tomato necrotic dwarf virus is originally known from Imperial County.[406]

More than 1 virus is usually present in any strawberry plant which has progressed to symptomatic infection.[407]

Lettuce Mosaic Virus has caused severe losses at times up to 100%.[408]: 282 

Insurance

[edit]

As with the entire country there is USDA subsidized crop insurance for the state.[409] The Risk Management Agency provides various insurance schemes and deadlines by County and by crop.[409]

Research, testing, and propagation material

[edit]
FSU researcher and Hmong farmer

Foundation Plant Services[410] (FPS) is a part of UCD's College of Agriculture which serves the horticultural industries. FPS performs several services including testing for diseases (especially viral diseases), identifying varieties of unknown plant samples, and supplying cuttings (vegetative propagation material) from in situ individuals they maintain.[410] They use a library of published Simple Sequence Repeats (SSRs) known to be relevant to the state's strawberry industry to identify those varieties specifically.[373] California Seed & Plant Lab is an even more active, private molecular lab for the strawberry industry.[373] CS&PL tests for clients here and around the world.[373]

California's experiences with the Vine mealybug, Glassy-winged sharp-shooter, and Pierce's disease have informed the process of creating geographic models for the spread of pests and diseases and their management in viticulture around the world.[411]: 43  See § Glassy-winged sharpshooter and § Pierce's Disease.

As of 2022 Professor Juan Pablo Giraldo (UCR) has been making great progress since 2013 in nanomaterials applied to crops.[412][413]

The University of California is one of the two institutions claiming ownership of the CRISPR/Cas9 patent.[414] This technique has great promise for genetic improvement of agricultural organisms.[414] What ever the outcome of the patent litigation, a license from UC or the Broad Institute or both may be required to produce such products in the future.[414]

Mexican farmworker learning additional skills in Salinas, 2018

Labor

[edit]

The UC Davis Farm Labor program studies the state's farmworkers and provides information about them.[415]

The union organizing campaign of César Chávez and its impact on the industry has become a well known chapter in American history.[416]: 63  His movement was also joined by artists such as famed theater and film director Luis Valdéz.[417]: 92  Ecofeminists have supported the United Farm Workers' strikes including Chávez's Grape boycott, especially for their positions on pesticides.[418]

Despite the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, Taylor & Thilmany 1992 found that the state's farmers did not reduce their hiring of illegal immigrants as farmworkers.[419] Indeed, illegal immigration inflows increased in the 1990s.[420]

In addition to advising producers, the Statewide Integrated Pest Management program (UC IPM) began training farmworkers in 1988.[421]: 382 

By the late 1990s the large immigrant population had expanded the workforce, reduced wages and working time per worker.[422]: 122  The reanalysis of Khan et al., 2004 finds that increased production of labor demanding crops increases agricultural labor demand, but does not necessarily have to because the same workers could have been hired to perform more hours.[423] For many decades the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) left farmworkers alone.[424] INS and then CBP chose not to do any significant enforcement in agriculture, hospitality, or construction.[424] Especially in the Northern Sacramento Valley and Southern San Joaquin Valley, farmworkers had risen to a high proportion of the population by 2013.[425]

The broader implications of intensified immigration enforcement are significant. The U.S. agricultural industry relies heavily on immigrant labor, with undocumented workers comprising a substantial portion of the workforce. In California, estimates suggest that undocumented immigrants make up about 70% of the state's agricultural workers.[426]

Despite the passage of the California Agricultural Labor Relations Act of 1975, by 2012 unions were less popular with farmworkers than they had been before it was passed.[427]

The Borello 1988 decision classifies strawberry sharecroppers as independent contractors.[428]

Even when immigration was unrestricted, strawberry growers felt in 2017 that labor supply was still too tight.[429] Farmers here were solid supporters of candidate and then President Trump, but were quickly surprised by the rhetoric of the administration due to the labor situation in the industry.[430] As late as 2017 the illegal workforce was still projected to grow.[431] A Pew Research Center analysis by Passel & Cohn expected continued lax enforcement to produce a continued population boom, including among California's agricultural workers.[431] During and after the escalated deportation raids the lack of normal labor opened opportunities for others.[432] Many high school students with farmworker family members quit school to join them in the fields.[432]

Some farmworkers here are not employed here all year but instead travel to other agricultural employment while California is in the off season.[433]

Although the entire tomato harvest was performed by laborers until recently, machines for harvest have been developed.[434] The harvest of processing tomatoes is now entirely done by machines.[434] The fresh tomato market still must be supplied by laborers however.[434] See § Tomatoes. Just before the 2018 deportations began, in 2017 strawberry pickers earned ~$150/day or ~$18.75/hour.[435]

The right personal protective equipment is required for fumigant applicators and those working nearby.[436] Practices and training and provided by the state Department of Pesticide Regulation.[436]

As of 2019, 9% of all unauthorized immigrants in California are employed in this industry.[437]

Enforcement of state laws and regulations regarding farm labor and pesticides is the responsibility of the County Agricultural Commissioners.[438]: 19 

Harrison & Getz 2015 study organic fruit and vegetable workers here and find that working conditions generally improve with increasing farm size.[439] Stockton et al., 2017's meta analysis shows workers were earning two-thirds of the average Californian due to a combination of low wages and underemployment.[440]

Hundreds of thousands of members of native Mexican ethnics are estimated to live in the state as farmworkers.[441]

The state Department of Industrial Relations (DIR)[442] regulates and provides information for workers and employers. DIR's Labor Enforcement Task Force (LETF) enforces such requirements as overtime.[443] UCANR and UCCE also provide information for employers' business planning.[444]

During 2021 field workers have been severely dissatisfied with working conditions.[445] They complain of both suffering from the ongoing pandemic and from the financial impact of missing work.[445]

The California Strawberry Scholarship Program is operated by the California Strawberry Growers' Fund.[446] As of 2022 it has awarded over $2 million for the schooling of strawberry pickers' children.[446] The California Table Grape Growers have a similar program.[447]

Billikopf has repeatedly (Billikopf 1999, Billikopf 2001) found that improved working conditions improve worker productivity of strawberry pickers.[448]

Demand for workers in grape cultivation is greatest from late June to early November for the San Joaquin Valley, and mid-May to early July for the Coachella Valley.[449]

The Indigenous Farmworker Study is a program of the Indigenous Program of California Rural Legal Assistance which collects information on natives of Mexico employed in agriculture here.[450]

Enforcement of labor laws has had little success in improving working conditions.[451]

Richards 2018 finds chronic labor shortage in some sectors.[452]

Goodhue et al. 2011 find Spotted Wing Drosophila imposes high labor costs in strawberry and raspberry.[453]

Guthman 2017 finds many strawberry growers advocate for soil fumigants as a way to maintain employment for strawberry field workers.[454]

The 2022–2023 California floods devastated strawberry, other berries and greens cultivation areas, and impacted worker housing.[455]

California's agricultural sector is heavily dependent on immigrant labor, with a significant portion of its workforce lacking legal status. According to the U.S. Department of Labor's National Agricultural Workers Survey (NAWS), conducted between 2015 and 2019, approximately 49% of hired crop farmworkers in California were unauthorized immigrants.[456]

Recent immigration enforcement actions have had notable impacts on California's agricultural communities. For instance, a workplace raid in Kern County in February 2025 led to the detention of numerous farmworkers, disrupting local farming operations and instilling fear among immigrant laborers.[457]

Unions

[edit]

In 2021, the Supreme Court of the United States under Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid struck down the right of organizers to enter California farms outside of working hours to unionize workers.[458][459][460]

Protests

[edit]
  • In April 2024, over 100 farm workers protested for better wages and working conditions, asking for a minimum of US$26/hr. In 2024, farmworkers in Santa Barbara County earned an average hourly wage of ~$17/hr.[461][462]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia

Agriculture in California constitutes the state's primary agricultural industry, encompassing the irrigated production of over 400 commodities across diverse climates, from the Central Valley's vast orchards and fields to coastal vegetable regions, yielding $61.2 billion in cash receipts in 2024 and accounting for approximately 2% of the state's while supporting extensive related economic activity. The sector dominates U.S. output, supplying nearly half of the nation's fruits, nuts, and , with top-value products including at $8.13 billion, almonds at $5.7 billion, and grapes at $5.6 billion annually.
This productivity stems from advanced irrigation infrastructure and but hinges on agriculture's consumption of about 40% of the state's total —or 80% of developed supplies—amid chronic shortages exacerbated by regulatory restrictions on groundwater extraction and surface diversions, leading to fallowed land and debates over versus environmental mandates. The industry also relies heavily on seasonal migrant labor, with over 75% of farmworkers undocumented, fueling controversies around wages, working conditions, and policy impacts on labor availability and costs. Innovations in and pest management have bolstered yields, yet persistent challenges from stringent environmental regulations, market volatility, and competition underscore the sector's vulnerability despite its global significance.

Economic Significance

Production Value and National Leadership

In 2024, California's farms and ranches generated a record $61.2 billion in cash receipts from agricultural output, surpassing $60 billion for the first time and reflecting a 3.6% increase from $59.4 billion in 2023. This value positioned California as the top agricultural state in the United States, accounting for approximately 11% of national farm cash receipts. The state's dominance stems from its production of over 400 commodities, including nearly half of U.S. and more than three-quarters of fruits and nuts. California leads national production in numerous high-value categories, with dairy products topping the list at $8.6 billion in 2024, followed by almonds at $5.7 billion and grapes at $5.6 billion. The state supplies nearly 100% of U.S. almonds and artichokes, over 90% of strawberries, and a of grapes used for wine, raisins, and table varieties. In , California produces about 18% of the nation's , solidifying its role as the leading dairy state. These contributions underscore California's unparalleled scale, driven by specialized crops that command premium markets domestically and globally.

Export Contributions and Global Trade

California's agricultural sector is the leading contributor to U.S. farm exports, accounting for approximately 12.8 percent of the national total in recent years. In 2023, the state's agricultural exports reached $22.4 billion, representing a decline of 5.9 percent from the previous year amid global market fluctuations and pressures. This value underscores California's dominance in high-value commodities suited for international markets, such as tree nuts and dairy products, which benefit from the state's and advanced systems enabling year-round production. Exports constitute nearly 40 percent of the state's agricultural output, highlighting the sector's reliance on foreign to sustain incomes and investments. Almonds remain the top exported commodity, generating $4.4 billion in foreign sales in 2023 and comprising about 80 percent of global supply from California orchards. Other key exports include pistachios, dairy products, wine, and walnuts, which together drive the majority of outbound shipments. These products leverage California's competitive advantages in quality and volume, with tree nuts alone often exceeding $6 billion annually in export value during peak years. The state's exports also encompass fruits like strawberries and table grapes, as well as vegetables such as and , positioning California as the primary U.S. source for many specialty crops in . Primary destinations for California agricultural exports include Canada, Mexico, the European Union, Japan, and China, with emerging growth in markets like the Philippines and India. Developed economies traditionally absorb the bulk of shipments, though developing regions have shown the strongest expansion due to rising demand for premium California produce. Trade agreements and port infrastructure, particularly through facilities in Long Beach and Oakland, facilitate efficient distribution, though tariffs and geopolitical tensions—such as those affecting dairy and nut exports to China—periodically disrupt volumes. Overall, these exports bolster California's economy by generating foreign exchange and supporting over 400,000 farm-related jobs tied to global supply chains.

Employment, Wages, and Broader Economic Multipliers

![IN_LETTUCE_FIELDS_ALONG_THE_COLORADO_RIVER%252C_MEXICAN_FARM_WORKER_CARRIES_BOXES_TO_FIELD_PICKERS_-NARA-_549084.jpg][float-right] California's agricultural sector directly employs an average of 420,000 hired workers annually, with peaking at nearly 500,000 during summer periods and falling below 300,000 in winter. As of September 2024, total jobs stood at 415,100, representing approximately 2.2% of the state's overall . High and turnover mean the pool of unique farmworkers exceeds 800,000 individuals annually, many engaging in short-term or intermittent labor to fill around 413,000 job slots. The is predominantly composed of foreign-born laborers, with crop production, fruits, nuts, , and accounting for the bulk of positions and over 90% of the sector's $18 billion in annual wages as of 2023. Farmworker wages in California averaged $17.55 per hour in 2023 for field and livestock roles, reflecting a 6% increase from the prior year but remaining below the nonfarm hourly average of about $30. Piece-rate compensation, prevalent in harvesting tasks, introduces variability, often resulting in effective hourly rates closer to $15-18 depending on productivity and crop type. These earnings support a labor-intensive industry where mechanization lags in perishable commodities, sustaining demand for manual work despite regulatory pressures on overtime and minimum wage compliance. Beyond direct jobs, agriculture generates substantial indirect and induced economic effects through multipliers in , transportation, wholesale, and retail sectors. In the Central Valley, the dominant agricultural region, each dollar of farm production yields an estimated $3.50 in total economic output, amplifying impacts via activities like , nut hulling, and . Statewide, these linkages sustain additional thousands of jobs and contribute to value-added chains, with alone representing a key multiplier driver; for instance, Santa Cruz County agriculture's $1.566 billion direct output in 2023 expanded to broader economic contributions exceeding initial farm receipts via related industries. Such effects underscore agriculture's role in bolstering rural economies, though vulnerabilities to labor shortages and input costs can constrain multiplier realization.

Major Commodities

Dairy and Livestock Production

California's dairy industry leads the nation in production, accounting for approximately 18-19% of total U.S. output, with a 2024 cash value of $8.6 billion for products. The state maintained about 1.71 million cows in late 2024, primarily concentrated in the , where large-scale operations dominate due to favorable feed availability from and other crops. Average yield per cow reached 23,585 pounds annually in 2024, supported by high-energy total mixed rations and advanced , though production per cow dipped slightly in late 2024 due to seasonal factors. Beyond fluid milk, California ranks second nationally in cheese production at over 2.4 billion pounds in recent years, with output focused on varieties like cheddar and mozzarella for domestic and export markets. Butter and ice cream production also lead the U.S., driven by processing plants in Fresno and Tulare counties that convert raw milk into value-added products. Dairy operations face structural shifts, including herd consolidation into fewer, larger farms—averaging over 1,000 cows per operation—amid rising input costs and regulatory pressures on water and emissions, yet output has grown through efficiency gains rather than herd expansion. Exports of California dairy products, including nonfat dry milk at 697 million pounds in 2024, contribute significantly to the state's $61.2 billion agricultural total. Livestock production beyond dairy emphasizes beef cattle and calves, valued at $4.98 billion in 2024, with about 520,000 head on feed as of early 2025, mostly in finishing operations rather than cow-calf enterprises due to land constraints. output relies on in foothills and rangelands, supplemented by feedlots in the Central , but California trails major beef states like in slaughter volume, focusing instead on high-value calves from dairy herds. Sheep and lamb inventories remain modest at around 500,000 head, primarily for and in drier inland areas, while production for hit 74,000 head in 2025 estimates, serving niche ethnic markets. , including layers for eggs, contributes smaller shares, with production integrated into mixed operations but overshadowed by dairy's scale. Overall, sectors leverage California's residues for feed, enhancing economic multipliers, though cycles and feed costs periodically constrain expansion.

Tree Fruits, Nuts, and Citrus

California produces the majority of the ' tree nuts, including nearly all almonds, , and , which together generated over $8.75 billion in farm value in 2024. Almonds led with $5.66 billion, followed by at $2.05 billion and at $1.04 billion. The state's almond crop reached an estimated 2.8 billion pounds in 2024, supported by bearing acreage exceeding 1.6 million acres primarily in the . supplies about 80% of the world's almonds, with exports valued at $4.4 billion in 2023. production hit a record 1.5 billion pounds in-shell for the 2023/24 season, driven by expanding acreage to 488,000 bearing acres in 2024. Walnut output totaled 799,307 tons in 2023, though forecasts for 2025 project 710,000 tons amid fluctuating yields. Tree fruits, particularly stone fruits, thrive in California's , with the state accounting for over 70% of U.S. peach production by volume in 2024. utilized production reached 510,000 tons in 2024, concentrated in the Central Valley, while sweet cherries yielded 94,150 tons valued at $296 million. California dominates domestic plums at 95% of U.S. output and apricots at 31,430 tons utilized in recent years. These crops, harvested from late spring through summer, support local markets and processing for dried fruits like prunes. Citrus production centers in the southern for oranges and coastal areas for lemons, with California's utilized output totaling 4.15 million tons in the 2023-24 season, up 5% from prior year. All-orange production stood at 47.5 million boxes, reflecting bearing acreage of 109,461 for navels and additional varieties. The state captures 79% of U.S. fresh in 2024, bolstered by acreage of 49,770 acres. These perennial crops demand substantial irrigation, with nuts and citrus occupying millions of acres in water-scarce regions, yet they underpin California's export strength, contributing to $22.4 billion in total agricultural exports in 2023. Production faces variability from weather, pests, and market prices, but advancements in orchard management sustain high yields.

Vegetables, Row Crops, and Grains

California leads the in vegetable production, harvesting 1.19 million acres in 2022 and generating $11.67 billion in sales, representing 41% of the national total. In 2023, the state's vegetable sector produced key crops including , tomatoes, , carrots, and onions, contributing roughly $12.7 billion to agricultural cash receipts, or about 20% of the state's total gross income from farming. These crops are predominantly grown in the Central Valley, , and , relying on intensive irrigation and labor to achieve high yields on suited to year-round cultivation due to California's . Lettuce production reached 4.09 million tons across 263,500 acres in 2023, valued at $3.93 billion, with varieties such as head, leaf, and romaine dominating output at average yields of 245 to 350 hundredweight per acre. Tomatoes, primarily for processing, yielded 13.2 million tons from 271,900 acres, generating $2.01 billion, including $1.75 billion from processing tomatoes at 50.22 tons per acre; fresh market tomatoes added smaller volumes but higher per-unit value. Broccoli output totaled 675,500 tons from 96,500 acres, valued at $942 million with yields of 140 hundredweight per acre, while carrots produced 1.08 million tons across 54,500 acres for $1.67 billion at 395 hundredweight per acre. Onions contributed 942,400 tons from 40,100 acres, valued at $376 million. Row crops, often rotated with vegetables for , include processing tomatoes (as noted above), , , and sugar beets. was harvested on 94,800 acres in 2023, producing 284,000 bales at 1,438 pounds per acre for $315 million in value, concentrated in the where availability influences planting decisions. for , a major feed crop, spanned 510,000 acres yielding 3.34 million tons at 6.54 tons per acre, valued at $851 million. Sugar beets produced 1.1 million tons from 22,600 acres at 48.8 tons per acre, generating $90 million. These crops demand significant inputs, with alone accounting for substantial irrigated acreage amid competition from higher-value permanent crops. Grains in California focus on rice as the dominant commodity, with wheat and barley playing secondary roles suited to cooler, wetter northern valleys. Rice production in 2023 totaled 44 million from 512,000 acres at 85.9 per acre, valued at $1.47 billion and comprising a significant portion of U.S. medium- and short-grain varieties grown in the flood-irrigated fields. Wheat output reached 250,100 tons from 97,000 acres at 2.58 tons per acre for $82 million, while barley yielded 34,200 tons across 19,000 acres at 1.2 tons per acre, valued at $7.6 million. Rice exports alone exceeded $741 million, underscoring the sector's role in global trade despite domestic consumption priorities.

Grapes, Wine, and Specialty Crops

California leads U.S. grape production across wine, table, and varieties, generating a farm value of $5.64 billion and ranking as the state's second-most valuable crop. The state accounts for virtually all domestic table grapes, over 90% of wine grapes, and a substantial share of s. Bearing acreage stood at approximately 925,000 acres in 2023, though over 25,000 acres were removed in the following year amid market pressures and replanting. Production is concentrated in the Central Valley for table and grapes, which benefit from hot, dry summers, while premium wine grapes thrive in cooler coastal areas like Napa, Sonoma, and Monterey counties.
Grape Type2023 Crush (tons)2024 Crush (tons)2024 Avg. Price per Ton
Wine Grapes3,899,6312,918,158$731 (all varieties)
Raisin Varieties~49,000 (est.)23,630$295
Table Varieties~166,000 (est.)53,463$150
The 2024 grape crush marked the smallest wine grape volume in two decades at 2.92 million tons, a 25% decline from 2023, attributed to adverse weather, oversupply, and reduced demand. Raisin and table grape crushes fell even more sharply, by over 50% and 67%, respectively, reflecting poor yields and market rejection of surplus. Average prices for wine grapes dropped slightly to $731 per ton, while raisin and table varieties saw mixed changes amid volatile conditions. California's wine industry, processing these grapes, dominates national output at 78.5% of U.S. production volume. The state hosts over 4,700 bonded wineries, with economic contributions exceeding $50 billion annually to the state economy through direct sales, , and . Exports remain vital, though facing headwinds from global tariffs and shifting consumption; in 2023, wine-related exports supported significant foreign sales when valued at the grape equivalent. Recent oversupply has led to vineyard removals and unharvested fruit, as growers reject low-price contracts from wineries. Specialty crops beyond grapes, such as nursery products, flowers, and certain berries, complement this sector but are often categorized separately; grapes themselves qualify as high-value specialties sensitive to variations, with wine varieties particularly vulnerable to warming trends affecting quality and yields. Sustainable practices, adopted across much of the acreage, aim to mitigate these risks through and water efficiency.

Geographic and Climatic Factors

Central Valley Dominance

The Central Valley, a vast stretching approximately 450 miles from the in the north to the in the south, serves as the epicenter of California's agricultural production, accounting for more than half of the state's total agricultural output value. This region utilizes less than 1 percent of U.S. farmland yet contributes 8 percent of the nation's agricultural output by value and produces about one-quarter of the country's food supply, including one-third of its and three-quarters of its fruits and nuts. Its dominance stems from a combination of geographic scale, with over 7 million acres under cultivation, and human-engineered systems that transform semi-arid conditions into productive farmland. Climatically, the Central Valley benefits from a Mediterranean regime characterized by hot, dry summers with temperatures often exceeding 100°F (38°C) and mild, wet winters averaging 40-50°F (4-10°C), providing a long frost-free of 250-300 days that enables high-yield, diverse cropping patterns such as double-cropping in some areas. Annual precipitation ranges from 5-20 inches, concentrated in winter months, which is insufficient for rain-fed agriculture but ideal when supplemented by for crops requiring consistent moisture during peak summer demand. Fertile alluvial soils, deposited by rivers originating in the Sierra Nevada, offer deep, well-drained loamy profiles rich in and minerals, supporting over 250 commodity types including tree nuts, row crops, and grains. These natural endowments, rather than inherent superiority alone, interact with practices to yield exceptional productivity, as evidenced by the region's output of nearly all U.S. almonds (over 80 percent of global supply via California), pistachios, and walnuts, alongside major shares of , tomatoes, and . Irrigation infrastructure, including the federal and State Water Project, delivers water from northern rivers and the to sustain approximately 75 percent of California's irrigated acreage concentrated in the Valley, enabling the cultivation of water-intensive crops that would otherwise be untenable in the region's low-rainfall environment. This engineered has expanded dramatically since the early , with pumping supplementing surface supplies during droughts, though it underscores the causal dependence on imported water for sustained dominance—without it, natural aridity would limit output to dryland grains and . The Valley's agricultural value exceeds $17 billion annually for its core crops, reinforcing its role as a national linchpin, though vulnerabilities to water allocation constraints highlight the non-natural fragility of this productivity model.

Salinas Valley and Coastal Areas

The , situated in Monterey County along California's central coast, features a Mediterranean maritime climate with mild temperatures averaging 50–70°F (10–21°C) year-round, influenced by coastal fog and breezes that moderate summer heat and provide natural . This climate, combined with deep, fertile alluvial soils derived from the Salinas River and its tributaries, supports intensive production of cool-season unsuitable for hotter inland regions. Annual rainfall averages 14–16 inches, concentrated in winter, necessitating supplemental from and surface sources. Monterey County, encompassing the , leads California in vegetable production, with key crops including , , , and strawberries. Lettuce dominates, accounting for a significant portion of the nation's supply, alongside other leafy greens and brassicas that thrive in the valley's conditions. The region supplies approximately 70% of U.S. lettuce during peak seasons, facilitated by year-round growing capabilities due to the temperate environment. Strawberries, grown on fumigated soils, represent another high-value crop, benefiting from the mild winters. In 2023, Monterey County's agricultural output totaled $4.35 billion, a 6.14% decline from 2022 due to weather variability, yet contributed over $2.88 billion, underscoring the valley's dominance in fresh produce. This value reflects diversified specialty crops, with strawberries exceeding $1 billion in recent reports, highlighting the economic scale driven by export-oriented, labor-intensive farming. Compliance costs for production, such as , have risen 63% over eight years to $1,600 per acre, pressuring margins amid regulatory demands. Coastal areas extending south, including Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, complement Salinas production with berry crops suited to foggy, frost-free microclimates. Ventura County, a strawberry powerhouse, generated $575 million from strawberries in 2020, comprising over 25% of its $2 billion farm sales, with rotations emphasizing amid intensive cultivation. These regions leverage proximity to ports for fresh market exports, though face salinity and management challenges from practices. Overall, coastal agriculture emphasizes high-value perishables, contributing to California's leadership in and .

Southern Desert and Other Regions

![IN_LETTUCE_FIELDS_ALONG_THE_COLORADO_RIVER, MEXICAN_FARM_WORKER_CARRIES_BOXES_TO_FIELD_PICKERS - NARA -549084.jpg][float-right] The southern desert regions of California, encompassing the , , and Palo Verde Valley, feature arid climates with extreme heat and minimal rainfall, rendering agriculture dependent on extensive from the via canals such as the All-American and Coachella Canals. These areas produce winter , specialty fruits, and forage crops, capitalizing on mild winters to supply off-season produce to national markets. In 2023, Imperial County's agricultural output reached a gross value of $2.69 billion across 578,659 harvested acres, marking a 2.36% increase from 2022, driven by , , and field crops. Imperial Valley stands as a primary hub for vegetable production, ranking first statewide in alfalfa, carrots, and sugar beets, with over 65 crop varieties including lettuce, broccoli, and melons grown on approximately 500,000 farmable acres. Vegetable and melon output alone exceeded $1.1 billion in recent years, supported by flood and systems that deliver water, of which the region consumes more than and combined annually. poses ongoing risks, with agreements like the Imperial Irrigation District's 2023 conservation of 100,000 acre-feet highlighting tensions between agricultural demands and basin-wide shortages. In , cultivation dominates, with production spanning over 120 years from imported varieties, alongside vegetables, citrus, table grapes, and bell peppers irrigated partly by allocations. The Water District manages over two-thirds of farmland irrigation using canal-delivered river water, sustaining high-value crops in a region where dates remain a signature . Palo Verde Valley focuses on melons, alfalfa, cotton, and vegetables, with irrigation districts fallowing up to 30% of farmland in deals to transfer water to urban , as in a 2025 agreement covering 26,000 acres for three years. These transfers, totaling millions in payments to farmers since the 1990s, underscore the economic trade-offs between desert farming and metropolitan needs. Overall, southern desert agriculture contributes significantly to California's $59 billion annual farm output but faces sustainability pressures from over-reliance on a depleting , with alone accounting for substantial diversions.

Historical Development

Pre-1850: Indigenous and Colonial Foundations

Prior to European contact, California's indigenous populations, estimated at around 300,000 individuals across diverse tribes such as the , Chumash, and , relied on sophisticated rather than domesticated crop . These groups practiced extensive controlled burning to maintain oak savannas, clear underbrush, and promote production, a caloric staple processed into flour via leaching and grinding; acorns could yield up to 50% of some tribes' diet. Other techniques included selective harvesting of wild seeds, bulbs, roots, and grasses, with limited systems employed by tribes like the Paiute to enhance floodplain seed yields. This proto-agricultural approach, often termed forest gardening or , supported high population densities—among the highest for non-agricultural societies globally—through ecological stewardship rather than tillage or planting, as California's and varied micro-ecosystems favored over seen in regions like the Southwest. The arrival of Spanish explorers in 1769 marked the introduction of European-style agriculture, beginning with the establishment of Franciscan missions under . The first , initiated cultivation of , , corn, beans, peas, lentils, and garbanzos, alongside fruit trees such as olives, grapes, figs, and by the late 18th century; , founded in 1782, reportedly grew over a dozen varieties including apples, pears, peaches, and pomegranates by 1793. Livestock imports included , sheep, , , and pigs, with herds expanding rapidly due to native labor from neophytes (baptized indigenous converts) who tilled fields and herded under mission oversight. By 1832, at the peak of mission prosperity, the 21 missions collectively managed over 150,000 head of , 120,000 sheep, and substantial numbers of and other animals, producing surpluses for local self-sufficiency and trade. Following Mexican independence in 1821, the secularization acts of 1833–1836 redistributed mission lands to private grantees, fostering the rancho system that dominated pre-1850 agriculture. Mexican authorities issued approximately 500 land grants between 1821 and 1846, often exceeding 10,000 acres each, totaling over 8 million acres devoted primarily to extensive cattle ranching for the hide-and-tallow trade with merchants. Ranchos featured herds numbering in the thousands per property—sometimes 1,000 cattle slaughtered annually at a single matanza (slaughtering event)—with minimal crop production beyond subsistence gardens, as the focus shifted to grazing on vast, unfenced ranges. This pastoral economy, reliant on labor including indigenous and workers, established enduring land patterns but proved vulnerable to droughts and market fluctuations by the 1840s.

1850–1900: Gold Rush Transition to Commercial Farming

The California Gold Rush, peaking from 1848 to 1855, triggered a surge in population from roughly 15,000 non-Native residents in 1848 to over 300,000 by 1854, creating acute demand for food that initially relied on imports from Chile, Hawaii, and Australia. Local farmers responded rapidly, expanding production of staple crops like wheat and barley to meet mining camp needs, with wheat output rising from 7,700 bushels in 1850 to 41,622 bushels in the interior and 205,385 bushels in the San Francisco Bay area by 1852. By the mid-1850s, the state achieved self-sufficiency in wheat, transitioning from subsistence to commercial scale as surplus production enabled exports starting in 1854, initially to Pacific markets and later to Britain. Livestock ranching also expanded to supply meat, hides, and dairy, with cattle herds growing to produce four times more cows by 1860 compared to 1848 levels, alongside annual butter output reaching significant volumes to feed urban centers like San Francisco. As placer mining yields declined after 1855, many former miners and immigrants shifted to agriculture, fostering large-scale "bonanza" wheat farms in the Central Valley that employed gang plows, headers, and early combines for efficiency. Wheat and barley dominated, occupying over 75% of cropland by 1879, but faced challenges from soil depletion and pests by the 1890s, prompting diversification. Infrastructure advancements accelerated commercialization: the completion of the in 1869 facilitated grain exports eastward, while irrigated farming emerged in the , increasing from less than 1% of farmland in 1869 to 5% by 1889, enabling reliable yields in arid regions. Early horticultural experiments gained traction, including introductions like the navel orange in the 1870s, though grains remained primary until the late 1880s when falling interest rates and rail improvements spurred orchard investments. By 1900, California ranked as the second-largest producer nationally, but the era's foundation in export-oriented grain and laid the groundwork for intensified and nut cultivation in the subsequent decades.

1900–1950: Irrigation Expansion and Industrialization

The period from 1900 to 1950 marked a transformative phase in California agriculture, driven primarily by the expansion of irrigation infrastructure that converted arid lands into productive farmland, alongside the shift toward more industrialized production methods. In 1899, irrigated acreage constituted only about 12 percent of California's improved farmland and less than 25 percent of harvested cropland, limiting output to dryland grains and extensive ranching. Private initiatives, bolstered by the 1887 Wright Act enabling irrigation districts, accelerated development, but federal intervention via the 1902 Newlands Reclamation Act established the U.S. Reclamation Service (later Bureau of Reclamation) to fund large-scale projects across arid western states, including California. This enabled the diversion of rivers like the Colorado, initially through private canals in the Imperial Valley starting in 1901, which by the 1920s irrigated nearly 500,000 acres despite early flooding crises resolved by U.S. Army engineers in 1907. Major further amplified capacity, particularly the (CVP), authorized by Congress in 1933 as a initiative to combat drought, floods, and unemployment. Construction began in 1935 with the Contra Costa Canal delivering water by 1940, followed by on the (completed 1945) and Friant Dam on the San Joaquin (1944), ultimately irrigating over 3 million acres by mid-century through reservoirs, canals, and power generation that supported pumping. These projects shifted cultivation from low-yield grains to high-value perennials like fruits, nuts, and , with irrigated acreage in expanding from approximately 3 million acres in 1900 to more than 7 million by 1950, contributing to an 18-million-acre national increase in western irrigated lands. Industrialization complemented irrigation by fostering capital-intensive operations, including and industries. Farms grew larger, with California cotton operations averaging five times the size of southern counterparts from the 1920s to 1950s, reflecting in machinery adoption like early tractors and harvesters that reduced labor dependency amid fluctuating seasonal workforces. Allied sectors boomed, with , packing, and transportation enabling market expansion; by 1910, the value of intensive crops such as , grapes, and matched that of extensive grains, positioning California as a global exporter. World War II demand spurred further intensification, including the 1942 for Mexican labor, though core advancements stemmed from irrigation-enabled specialization rather than policy alone. By 1950, these developments had elevated California's agricultural output, with the state's farm value surpassing national leaders in key commodities, though vulnerabilities like water dependency and soil salinization emerged from over-reliance on engineered supply. The era's causal chain—irrigation unlocking land potential, industrialization optimizing yields—laid the foundation for postwar dominance, predicated on hydrological feasibility over speculative ideals.

1950–2000: Postwar Boom and Diversification

Following , California agriculture experienced rapid expansion driven by surging domestic demand, technological advancements, and massive public investments in water infrastructure. The and subsequent State Water Project, operationalized from the 1950s onward, dramatically increased irrigated acreage, enabling cultivation on previously arid lands; irrigated cropland grew from 4.2 million acres in 1940 to 7.4 million by 1970, with supplying over 50% of needs by mid-century. Cash receipts from farm marketings rose from approximately $2.68 billion in 1955 to $25.5 billion by 2000, with total output tripling between 1949 and 1991 as measured by productivity indices. This boom solidified California's position as the nation's leading agricultural state in cash receipts every year since 1948, fueled by high-yield field crops like —which became the state's top commodity by 1950 and second nationally by 1959—and , alongside recovery. Diversification accelerated as farmers shifted from extensive grains and hay toward intensive, high-value specialty crops, reflecting adaptations to global markets and urban pressures that converted over 1 million acres of prime farmland to development between 1950 and 2000. By 1995, fruits, nuts, and vegetables accounted for 60% of crop value despite comprising only 28% of cropland, with horticultural products reaching 55% of farm-gate sales by 2002. The number of recognized crop varieties expanded from 200 in 1970 to 350 by 2000, including emerging organics—sales of which hit $260 million from 170,000 acres by 2002—and nursery products that thrived near metropolitan areas like San Diego. Dairy overtook traditional leaders, with California surpassing Wisconsin as the top U.S. milk producer by 1993, producing 32.2 billion pounds valued at $3.7 billion in 2000 alone. Yields per acre improved markedly, as in corn (117 to 170 bushels) and cotton (880 to 1,392 pounds) from the 1970s to early 2000s, supported by research-driven breeding and pest management. Mechanization and labor transitions underpinned this growth amid the 1964 termination of the , which had supplied seasonal Mexican workers. Adoption of mechanical harvesters—reaching 100% for cotton by 1965 and 95% for tomatoes by 1968—cut labor needs dramatically, as in processing tomatoes where workforce dropped from 45,000 to 5,000 by 2000, while overall hired farm labor peaked at 800,000 annually, 95% foreign-born by 1997. Farm consolidation reflected these efficiencies: the number of farms fell from 144,000 in 1950 to 87,500 in 2000, with average size rising from 260 to 318 acres, even as total farmland shrank from 37.5 million to 27.8 million acres due to . Exports surged to $6.5 billion by 2002, comprising 20% of production value, with federal marketing orders for commodities like almonds and raisins aiding stability from the 1950s. Despite these advances, environmental strains emerged, including overdraft and salinity issues in the , prompting early shifts toward efficient like drip systems on 30% of acreage by 1998.
Year RangeIrrigated Cropland (Million Acres)Key Infrastructure
19404.2Pre-CVP baseline
19707.4CVP/State Water Project expansion
1997 (San Joaquin)90% of croplandDrip/sprinkler adoption

2000–Present: Modern Challenges and Record Outputs

California's agricultural sector has achieved record cash receipts since 2000, culminating in $61.2 billion in 2024, the first year exceeding $60 billion, driven primarily by high-value commodities such as products ($8.6 billion), almonds ($5.7 billion), and grapes ($5.6 billion). This growth reflects expansions in acreage and yields for nut crops and sustained exports, with almonds nearing record production levels of 2.8 billion pounds in 2024. Despite periodic contractions in physical output due to environmental stresses, the sector's economic value has risen steadily, supported by global demand and premium pricing for specialty crops like strawberries and . Persistent has posed the most acute challenge, exacerbated by multi-year including the severe 2012–2016 episode, which prompted emergency pumping and fallowing of over 500,000 acres, resulting in estimated statewide agricultural losses exceeding $2.7 billion. The state's conditions since 2000 have reduced allocations, forcing reliance on aquifers and leading to implementation of the 2014 Sustainable Management Act (SGMA), which mandates sustainable extraction by 2040 but has accelerated land retirement in overdrafted basins. Recent , such as those persisting into 2023–2024, have constrained allocations further, with about 32% of under as of October 2025, intensifying competition between agricultural and urban users amid declining Sierra Nevada snowpack. Labor shortages and rising costs have compounded operational pressures, with farm wages increasing due to minimum wage hikes and reliance on the H-2A guest worker program, which grew to over 100,000 visas annually by the 2020s but faces administrative delays and higher employer burdens. Immigration policy restrictions since the early 2000s have reduced the domestic workforce, prompting mechanization efforts, though hand-harvest crops like fruits and vegetables remain vulnerable, contributing to idled fields during peak seasons. Regulatory and climatic factors, including stringent environmental rules and variable weather extremes like wildfires and heatwaves, have elevated input costs and pest pressures, yet the sector's adaptability—through crop shifts toward drought-tolerant varieties—has sustained output values. vulnerabilities, such as potential tariffs, threaten exports that account for over 20% of production, but domestic leadership in commodities like and nuts has buffered economic impacts. Overall, California's agriculture demonstrates resilience, posting record revenues amid these headwinds, though long-term sustainability hinges on infrastructure investments and reforms.

Innovations and Production Methods

Irrigation Technologies and Water Conservation

California's agricultural sector, operating in a Mediterranean climate with limited rainfall, relies heavily on irrigation to sustain production across approximately 9 million irrigated acres, consuming about 34 million acre-feet of water annually, primarily from surface diversions. This accounts for roughly 40% of the state's total water use on average, rising to 80% of developed supplies during dry periods. Traditional gravity-based methods, such as furrow and flood irrigation, remain prevalent for row crops like rice and alfalfa, applying water via surface flow but often resulting in higher evaporation and runoff losses. Pressurized irrigation systems, including sprinklers, micro-sprinklers, and drip, have gained adoption for their precision and reduced waste, delivering water directly to plant roots or via low-pressure sprays. , introduced commercially in the late , expanded from covering about 5% of irrigated land by to significantly higher shares by the , with acreage growing from roughly 300,000 to over 3 million acres in recent decades, particularly for high-value permanent crops like nuts and grapes. Studies indicate drip systems can reduce water use by up to 37%, saving an average of 2.2 acre-feet per acre while maintaining or increasing yields, though they require upfront investment and may elevate on-farm demands for pumping. Water conservation efforts integrate technology with management practices, such as soil moisture sensors, evapotranspiration-based scheduling, and tailwater recovery systems that recapture runoff for reuse. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) of 2014 mandates local agencies to prevent , prompting investments in efficient conveyance like lined canals and automated controls. Overall efficiency has improved through these measures, with applied water per acre declining alongside rising crop productivity per unit of water, though challenges persist from variable , regulatory constraints, and the economic incentives favoring water-intensive crops like almonds over less thirsty alternatives. Despite advancements, potential for further savings exists; field-scale analyses suggest optimizing irrigation timing or minor crop shifts could cut consumption by substantial margins without yield losses, but adoption lags due to costs and market dynamics prioritizing revenue over water minimization. State programs, including for system upgrades, aim to accelerate transitions, yet pressurized technologies' underscores trade-offs in California's water-.

Precision Agriculture, Mechanization, and Biotechnology

Precision agriculture in leverages technologies such as GPS-guided auto-steering, soil sensors, drones, and to optimize inputs like , fertilizers, and pesticides on high-value crops including almonds, grapes, and tomatoes grown in regions like the Central Valley. Adoption rates stand at approximately 27% across U.S. farms per the USDA's 2023 Agricultural Resource Management Survey, with higher utilization—over 50%—among large operations in suitable for row crops and orchards, enabling yield increases of up to 20% and input cost reductions. In orchards, tools like systems measure to refine , conserving amid chronic shortages, while AI-equipped vehicles in vineyards target herbicide application to weeds, minimizing chemical use. Mechanization transformed California agriculture from labor-intensive practices post-World War II, with widespread adoption of , harvesters, and sorters reducing reliance on seasonal workers and enabling scale in crops like , , and . By 1958, mechanical harvesting covered all major California crops, accounting for about half of the nation's , which lowered production costs and boosted global competitiveness despite rising labor expenses. The industry exemplifies this shift: mechanical harvesters processed less than 1% of the crop in 1961 but dominated by the late 1960s, displacing thousands of pickers while expanding acreage and output. Contemporary advances include semi-autonomous robots for strawberry harvesting, as developed by firms like Harvest CROO Robotics, which automate picking and packing to address labor shortages; however, state regulations as of 2025 prohibit fully driverless , requiring human oversight and limiting efficiency gains. Biotechnology, particularly genetically engineered (GE) crops, plays a limited role in California's fresh produce-dominated sector due to export market preferences for non-GE varieties and consumer aversion in premium segments. Herbicide-tolerant represents the primary commercial GE crop in the state, with U.S.-wide adoption of such traits reaching 95% for cotton by 2023, though California's horticultural focus—almonds, strawberries, and —sees negligible GE planting owing to regulatory scrutiny and labeling demands defeated in Proposition 37 (2012). Research into GE traits for pest resistance and drought tolerance continues at institutions like UC Davis, potentially yielding benefits like 22% higher outputs and 37% reductions observed globally, but economic barriers persist for non-staple crops.

Breeding, Research, and Pest Management Advances

The (UC) system's Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources (UC ANR) and institutions like UC Davis have led breeding programs targeting California's dominant crops, including strawberries, , and , with emphases on disease resistance, yield stability, and climate adaptation. In 2022, UC Davis received a $6.2 million federal grant to enhance breeding through genomic selection and genetic markers for traits like quality and resistance, addressing the crop's $2.3 billion annual value in the state. Similarly, the UC Davis breeding program, ongoing since the 1970s, has released varieties with improved self-fertility and resistance to pests such as navel orangeworm, integrating to accelerate development cycles. Advances in grain and tree fruit breeding incorporate novel genetic tools; for instance, UC Davis researchers developed a 2025 method using to block meiotic recombination in and , enabling faster stacking of desirable traits like and reduced for California's Central Valley production. The California Citrus Breeding Program, supported by a 2024 congressional appropriation, focuses on developing rootstocks resistant to Huanglongbing (citrus greening) and root rot, with field trials at USDA (ARS) sites evaluating hybrids suited to arid conditions. UC partnerships with the Innovative Genomics Institute have advanced CRISPR-based editing for climate-resilient traits in crops like tomatoes and grapes since 2025, prioritizing non-transgenic approaches to align with state regulatory preferences. Pest management research emphasizes (IPM), an ecosystem approach combining monitoring, biological controls, and targeted pesticides to minimize chemical use, as promoted by UC IPM Online since the . In 2024, the Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) allocated $3 million in grants for biologically integrated systems, funding projects on cover crops and beneficial s to suppress soil-borne pathogens in vegetable fields and reduce reliance on fumigants phased out under the 2010 amendments. Innovations include sterile releases for in orchards, achieving up to 90% suppression in trials by UC Kearney Agricultural Research and Extension Center, and pheromone mating disruption for vectors of Pierce's disease in grapes. The Biologically Integrated Farming Systems program, extended through 2025, supports on-farm demonstrations of predator augmentation, such as releasing blue orchard bees for pollination while controlling mites, demonstrating yield parity with conventional methods at lower input costs. USDA ARS projects in , such as breeding seedless table grapes resistant to powdery mildew since 2010, integrate genomic with field evaluations to counter evolving fungal threats, yielding varieties that maintain quality under reduced fungicide applications. Vertebrate pest research, funded annually by CDFA up to $500,000 as of 2025, targets ground squirrels and voles through bait improvements and habitat manipulation, reducing crop losses estimated at $100 million yearly in row crops. These efforts reflect a shift toward predictive modeling and precision applications, with UC Davis' Plant Breeding Academy training industry professionals in quantitative genetics to sustain 's $50 billion agricultural output amid biotic pressures.

Policy Framework and Government Role

Water Rights, Allocations, and Infrastructure

California operates a hybrid water system combining riparian and appropriative doctrines for , with riparian granting owners of land adjacent to streams reasonable use without priority based on time, while appropriative , established after the 1914 Water Commission Act, follow a prior appropriation principle where earlier claims hold seniority over later ones during shortages. historically included overlying for adjacent landowners and, since a 1949 ruling, correlative shares among overlying users, but pumping was largely unregulated until the Sustainable Management Act (SGMA) of 2014 mandated local agencies to achieve by 2040–2042, potentially requiring reductions in agricultural extractions in overdrafted basins covering about 20% of the state's farmland. Major infrastructure supporting agricultural water deliveries includes the federal (CVP), authorized in 1933 and operational from 1935, which stores and diverts water from northern rivers to irrigate over 3 million acres primarily in the Central Valley, delivering about 7 million acre-feet annually in wet years with roughly 75% allocated to farming. The State Water Project (SWP), approved in 1959 and beginning deliveries in 1962, conveys water via the from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta southward, supplying irrigation for 750,000 acres while prioritizing urban needs under contract terms that allocate up to 4.23 million acre-feet to agricultural contractors, though deliveries fluctuate with hydrology— for example, the 2025 initial Table A allocation stood at 5% before adjustments based on precipitation. California also receives up to 4.4 million acre-feet annually from the under the 1922 and subsequent agreements, with agricultural districts like the holding senior priority rights to about 3.1 million acre-feet, though voluntary conservation programs in 2023–2025 contributed over 1 million acre-feet to storage amid basin-wide shortages. Water allocations prioritize and contract stipulations, with agricultural users often facing cuts during droughts—CVP south-of-Delta farmers received initial 35% of contracted supplies in February 2025, later increased to 50% by April amid improved forecasts, reflecting operational coordination between federal and state projects to balance , environmental flows, and urban demands. SGMA's enforcement, including state intervention in non-compliant basins by 2025, has prompted some farmers to idle land or invest in efficient , as unrestricted pumping previously supported high-value crops but contributed to and depletion rates exceeding 1 foot per year in areas like the . consumes about 80% of California's developed , underscoring infrastructure's critical role in enabling the state's $50 billion annual farm output, though allocation rigidities and regulatory overlays have led to debates over reforming to enhance flexibility without undermining established rights.

Labor Regulations, Immigration, and Workforce Dynamics

California's agricultural sector relies heavily on a workforce estimated at 500,000 to 800,000 workers annually, with over 800,000 Latino agricultural workers employed each year, approximately half of whom are undocumented immigrants. This labor force is predominantly Hispanic, with workers of Mexican origin comprising the majority, and features lower educational attainment, a younger average age compared to the general population, and significant female participation at about one-third. Undocumented immigrants constitute 50-70% of the U.S. agricultural workforce and over one-third of crop workers nationally, a pattern mirrored in California where unauthorized workers fill critical roles in labor-intensive crops like fruits, nuts, and vegetables despite lacking legal protections. State labor regulations impose stringent requirements that elevate operational costs and influence workforce patterns. Assembly Bill 1066, enacted in 2016, phased in overtime pay for agricultural workers, culminating in mandatory overtime after 8 hours per day or 40 hours per week starting January 1, 2025, eliminating prior exemptions for smaller employers. Implementation has reduced average weekly hours by 3-5 and earnings by $80-120 per worker, as employers adjust schedules to minimize premiums, leading to fewer opportunities for piece-rate compensation common in harvesting. Additional mandates, including prevention standards and elevated minimum wages, contribute to regulatory costs averaging $1,600 per acre, a 63.7% rise since 2017, exacerbating pressures amid stagnant crop prices. These rules, while aimed at worker protections, accelerate labor cost increases outpacing nonfarm sectors and incentivize over manual labor in amenable crops. Immigration policies shape workforce availability, with California's agriculture showing limited adoption of the federal H-2A despite its role in supplying temporary foreign labor nationwide. In 2022, California certified H-2A jobs as part of the top states but at levels disproportionate to its output, constrained by state-specific , transportation, and add-ons that inflate costs beyond federal minima. Reliance on unauthorized fills gaps but exposes vulnerabilities to ; for instance, 2025 ICE operations in correlated with workforce reductions of 20-40%, unharvested crops, and $3-7 billion in losses, underscoring causal links between lax and sustained supply. Workforce dynamics reflect an aging demographic, declining influx of young immigrants, and chronic shortages intensified by regulations and enforcement. Farm labor costs have surged, prompting exits from the sector and shifts toward automation, while union efforts like those of the United Farm Workers—historically influential in securing contracts but now representing fewer workers—face resistance amid disputes over organizing laws such as card-check provisions. These factors drive higher production expenses, reduced domestic output for perishable goods, and incentives for growers to relocate labor-intensive operations to states with lighter regulations.

Subsidies, Trade Policies, and Regulatory Burdens

Federal agricultural subsidies to totaled $733 million in 2024, primarily through programs like crop disaster assistance ($530.7 million from 1995–2024, with recent emphases on and ad hoc payments) and direct payments, though the state ranks 10th nationally despite producing over 13% of U.S. agricultural output. These funds disproportionately benefit larger operations, with 92% of California farms receiving no payments, focusing on commodities like , , and rather than high-value specialty crops such as almonds and strawberries that dominate state production. State-level incentives, administered by the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), include grants for , , and underserved producers, such as the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program ($23.1 million federally allocated via the state in fiscal year 2021) and the California Incentive Program to boost fresh produce consumption. Critics argue these subsidies distort markets by favoring water-intensive crops in arid regions, though empirical data shows they mitigate risks from volatile weather and commodity prices without fully offsetting 's high production costs. California's agricultural exports reached $22.4 billion in 2023, down 5.9% from 2022, with almonds, pistachios, and dairy comprising major shares to markets like ($2.6 billion annually by 2023). Trade policies under agreements like the USMCA have facilitated access but exposed producers to retaliatory tariffs, as seen in the 2018–2019 U.S.- trade war, which reduced California's exports by 14.9% from 2017 levels and cost sectors like almonds billions in lost . Proposed tariffs in 2025, including up to 60% on Chinese imports, risk further retaliation targeting California tree nuts and wine, potentially erasing one-quarter of exports ($6 billion annually) and exacerbating domestic oversupply. These policies, while aiming to protect U.S. industries, impose causal costs on export-dependent agriculture through higher input prices and reduced foreign demand, with limited short-term offsets from subsidies. Regulatory burdens significantly elevate operational costs for California farmers, with compliance for environmental, labor, and food safety rules reaching $1,600 per acre for production in 2024, a 63.7% increase since 2017 amid stagnant farmgate prices (less than 1% rise). The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), implemented from 2014, mandates basin sustainability plans by 2022 and pumping limits by 2040, leading to land fallowing, reduced farmland values, and disproportionate impacts on small farmers through fees and allocation penalties, though it addresses chronic overdraft in regions like the Central Valley. Labor regulations, including elevated minimum wages ($16 per hour in 2024, rising annually) and restrictions under Assembly Bill 5 (2019), compound costs by limiting flexibility for seasonal hires, while the (CEQA) delays infrastructure like upgrades through litigation risks, contributing to an export competitiveness gap versus lower-regulation states. These cumulative mandates, while intended for sustainability and worker protections, empirically tighten margins and incentivize land idling, with studies indicating regulatory costs now exceed production gains in key commodities.

Environmental Interactions

Resource Use Efficiency and Sustainability Metrics

California agriculture, which irrigates approximately 9.6 million acres annually using about 34 million acre-feet of water in an average year, demonstrates varying levels of resource use efficiency across key inputs like water, nutrients, and energy. Economic water productivity, measured as gross value of production per acre-foot, has nearly doubled from $756 in 1980 to $1,400 in 2020 (in 2020 dollars), reflecting shifts toward higher-value crops and improved irrigation technologies despite overall water demand pressures. This sector accounts for roughly 40% of the state's total water use and 80% of developed supplies for human purposes, underscoring the need for metrics like crop water productivity (CWP), which varies by field and crop type, with recent mapping efforts revealing potential for targeted improvements in water allocation. Nutrient use efficiency, particularly for , remains a focus amid regulatory efforts to minimize leaching and emissions; California's nitrogen assessment estimates that enhanced practices could reduce annual nitrogen use by nearly 40,000 tons while maintaining yields. Recent studies highlight variable nitrogen use efficiency across , with precision application techniques improving uptake rates and reducing excess by up to 30% in optimized systems. Energy efficiency in farming operations, including pumping and machinery, benefits from innovations like programmable systems that can cut use by 13% through optimized scheduling. Overall, high yields—such as almonds at over 2,000 pounds per acre—indicate strong land productivity, though inputs for extraction in water-scarce regions elevate per-unit costs. Sustainability metrics reveal agriculture's environmental footprint, with the sector contributing about 8% of statewide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in recent inventories, where crop production accounts for 22.7% of agricultural emissions primarily from and in . Per-unit GHG emissions vary by ; for instance, production's cradle-to-farm-gate footprint emphasizes from , while field crops show lower intensities due to efficiencies. Indicators like sequestration potential and reduced adoption offer pathways for offsetting emissions, with programs targeting regenerative practices to enhance long-term without compromising output. These metrics, tracked via state inventories and farm-level assessments, prioritize empirical reductions in inputs per unit of output to balance productivity with ecological constraints.

Water Quality, Soil Degradation, and Air Emissions

Agricultural runoff from fertilizers and has led to widespread contamination in California's , particularly in the Central Valley, where synthetic fertilizers for row crops and orchards contribute nearly 60% of nitrates entering aquifers. In the , nitrates exceed drinking water standards in numerous wells, with detections in 97% of sampled sites, posing health risks such as in infants and potential links to in disadvantaged communities. Increased pumping during droughts, as observed from 1988 to 2017 data, exacerbates concentrations by drawing shallower, more contaminated water to supply agricultural demands covering 75% of California's irrigated land. residues from orchard floors and row crops also enter surface waters via stormwater runoff, impairing over half of monitored water bodies for aquatic toxicity, with neonicotinoids and organophosphates persisting in streams and contributing to ecological harm despite regulatory efforts. Soil degradation in California agriculture manifests primarily through salinization and erosion, driven by intensive irrigation on the state's 7 million irrigated acres, predominantly in the Central Valley. Approximately 1.5 million acres suffer salinity impairment, where accumulated salts from evaporated irrigation water reduce crop yields and require leaching that further stresses water resources. Erosion affects 8.8 million acres of farmland, accelerated by tillage in row crops and loss of vegetative cover, leading to topsoil loss rates exceeding natural replenishment in vulnerable areas. Halting irrigation, as seen in fallowed lands during water shortages, rapidly intensifies salinization, with studies modeling substantial salt buildup within short periods due to capillary rise from underlying aquifers. Despite these challenges, long-term assessments indicate that overall soil chemical quality has stabilized or improved since the mid-20th century, attributable to better management practices offsetting earlier degradation from expansion, though localized sodicity and compaction persist from heavy machinery and monoculture. Air emissions from California agriculture, especially dairy operations concentrated in the San Joaquin Valley, include (NH3) and particulate matter precursors, with accounting for 56% of statewide NH3 releases. concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) emit an average of 101.9 kg NH3 per hour per facility, reacting in the atmosphere to form fine particulate matter (PM2.5) that contributes to nearly 1,700 premature deaths annually from agricultural sources, per air quality modeling. from and adds to greenhouse gases, though digesters can reduce it by up to 80%, while persists as a key exacerbating regional and non-attainment of federal standards in valleys where monitoring gaps undervalue farm contributions relative to urban sources. from and further elevates PM10 levels, with emissions tied to soil disturbance in vast and fields, though conservation adoption mitigates some impacts.

Biodiversity, Pesticides, and Habitat Conflicts

California's agricultural expansion has converted vast areas of native , contributing to declines. Historical conversion of wildlands to farmland, facilitated by projects, has reduced riparian woodlands from approximately 775,000 acres pre-Gold Rush to about 12,000 acres today. Over 80% of San Francisco Bay's original tidal wetlands have been altered or displaced for agriculture and other uses, diminishing for tidal marsh-dependent species. In the Central Valley, agricultural development has transformed grasslands, wetlands, and vernal pools, which once supported diverse and , into fields; this is the primary threat to many special-status species. Between 1984 and 2010, over 195,000 hectares of were converted, predominantly to residential and exotic grasslands, further eroding native . Pesticide applications in California agriculture, while regulated and tracked more comprehensively than in other states, pose risks to non-target through drift, runoff, and direct exposure. In 2022, reported use totaled 181 million pounds of active ingredients across 92 million treated acres, though overall pesticide use declined by more than 5% from 2021, continuing a multi-year downward trend. pesticides, linked to neurotoxic effects in and pollinators, decreased by 54% in kilograms applied between 2016 and 2021 following the 2020 ban. Proximity of application sites to sensitive habitats amplifies conflicts, as residues can contaminate waterways and foraging areas, affecting such as salmonids and birds; buffer zones and restrictions under the Endangered Species Act often limit farming practices near these zones. Habitat conflicts arise acutely where agricultural needs intersect with protections for endangered species, constraining land use and resource allocation. In the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, listings of species like the Delta smelt have curtailed water deliveries to farms to maintain instream flows, reducing irrigated acreage and yield potential. Conversion of prime farmland to habitat restoration, as seen in programs idling or reverting fields for wetland recovery, has led to losses of up to 168,000 acres of irrigated land between 2008 and 2010, with 61% classified as prime farmland. These measures, while aimed at species recovery, exacerbate pressures on remaining agricultural lands, prompting debates over balancing food production with conservation; some agricultural practices, such as rice field flooding, provide seasonal surrogate habitats for waterbirds, mitigating partial losses. Soil biodiversity, crucial for ecosystem services like nutrient cycling, faces threats from tillage, monocropping, and chemical inputs, though cover cropping and reduced tillage can enhance microbial diversity in farmed soils.

Key Challenges and Controversies

Pests, Pathogens, and Biological Threats

California's agriculture sector, encompassing over 400 commodities, is particularly susceptible to pests, pathogens, and invasive biological agents due to its , extensive , and high-value perennial like grapes, citrus, and nuts. Exotic species introductions via global shipping and travel have led to annual economic losses exceeding $3 billion from invasive pests and diseases, with prevention efforts prioritized by the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) to avert quarantines and crop devastation. Insect vectors pose acute risks by transmitting pathogens and directly damaging crops. The glassy-winged sharpshooter (Homalodisca vitripennis), an invasive insect, spreads Pierce's disease—a bacterial caused by Xylella fastidiosa—primarily affecting grape, leading to vine decline, reduced yields, and eventual death. This inflicts annual costs of $110 million on the grape industry, including $45 million for control, , and prevention, $48 million in lost winegrape production and vine replacements, and $17 million for table and raisin grapes; unchecked spread by the sharpshooter could add $56 million more in winegrape losses yearly. The Asian citrus psyllid (Diaphorina citri), another exotic vector, transmits Huanglongbing (HLB or citrus greening), a lethal bacterial (Candidatus Liberibacter asiaticus) that causes fruit drop, bitter flavor, and tree mortality, threatening California's $7.6 billion sector despite current containment in . Invasive fruit flies, such as Mediterranean and Oriental species, recently eradicated in 2024 after detections, targeted over 250 and types, necessitating quarantines and treatments that disrupted exports. Fungal and other pathogens exacerbate vulnerabilities in key crops. In almonds, which dominate California's nut production, hull rot (Monilinia spp. and Rhizopus spp.) and Alternaria leaf spot (Alternaria alternata) reduce yields by infecting developing nuts and foliage, while emerging threats like red leaf blotch (Polystigma amygdalinum), first observed in 2024, cause defoliation and lower kernel quality across orchards. Fungal cankers from Botryosphaeriaceae species affect almonds, pistachios, walnuts, and olives, leading to branch dieback and tree loss through wood infections favored by pruning wounds and drought stress. Strawberries face chronic issues from soilborne pathogens like Fusarium oxysporum (wilt) and Verticillium dahliae, compounded by viruses such as strawberry leafroll virus, which stunt growth and diminish berry quality in the state's $2 billion industry. Invasive plants, infesting over 20 million acres or 20% of California's land, further threaten crops by competing for resources and harboring pests, amplifying control costs for growers. These biological threats underscore causal links between unchecked introductions and cascading agricultural disruptions, with empirical data from state monitoring highlighting the efficacy of early detection over reactive measures, though regulatory delays and trade volumes perpetuate risks. Government programs, including CDFA's pest exclusion and USDA collaborations, have mitigated some outbreaks, but persistent incursions via ports demand vigilant border inspections to safeguard output.

Crime, Theft, and Security Issues

California's agricultural sector experiences elevated risks of targeting high-value equipment, crops, and irrigation resources, often perpetrated by organized groups, resulting in millions of dollars in annual losses and broader economic ripple effects such as increased premiums and market disruptions. These crimes exploit the vast, remote nature of farmland, with thieves employing methods like fake documentation for transport and resale, sometimes across state lines or internationally. responses include specialized task forces, but underreporting and jurisdictional challenges hinder full quantification, though documented incidents highlight a persistent upward trend. Farm equipment theft has surged in the Central Valley, with heavy machinery like and harvesters frequently targeted due to their resale value. In October 2024, "Operation Tractor Pull" dismantled a major ring linked to cartels, recovering over $1.3 million in stolen items from at least 24 s since March, with seven arrests on charges including grand and . Similar operations have uncovered smuggling to , exacerbating losses estimated in the multimillions regionally. To counter this, counties like Solano promote equipment marking programs for recovery, while proposed legislation such as SB 224 seeks to classify agricultural vehicle as a distinct to enhance penalties and tracking. Crop theft, particularly of nuts and fruits, constitutes another major vulnerability, driven by global demand and ease of harvest during off-hours. Organized rings have stolen truckloads of almonds and pistachios using fraudulent bills of lading, with incidents like a 2022 case involving finished products valued in the hundreds of thousands. High-value tree nuts have been pilfered since the mid-2000s, prompting industry-wide tracking via serialized packaging and verification to verify origins. In 2025, Placer County orchards reported repeated thefts exceeding $250 per incident—triggering grand theft charges under Penal Code 487(b)(3)—while Central farmers in Merced and Fresno note widespread illegal picking of nuts and stone fruits, complicated by limited on expansive properties. Water theft further compounds security concerns, with unauthorized diversions from canals and wells disrupting for legitimate . A notable case involved a former water manager pleading guilty in May 2024 to conspiring in the of over $25 million worth of federally allocated water over two decades via unauthorized siphoning. pipe stripping from systems and wellheads has also risen, leading to crop failures and repair costs, often tied to metal markets. , including equipment sabotage and property damage, adds to these threats, prompting allocations like Imperial County's $194,160 in 2023 for enhanced patrols and deterrence. Farmers increasingly adopt private , GPS tracking, and community watch programs like Farm Watch to mitigate risks, though rural isolation limits effectiveness.

Labor Disputes, Shortages, and Immigration Impacts

California's agricultural workforce is predominantly immigrant, with estimates indicating that nearly two-thirds are immigrants and over 50 percent undocumented, primarily from . This reliance stems from the labor-intensive nature of crops like fruits, nuts, and , where domestic workers fill only about 32 percent of crop farmworker roles nationally, a figure likely lower in California due to its specialized production. Immigration enforcement has intensified labor shortages, with 56 percent of U.S. farmers reporting shortages in 2024, a trend amplified in by actions such as the 2025 ICE raids in areas like Oxnard, which reduced local agricultural workforces by 20-40 percent and led to $3-7 billion in losses alongside 5-12 percent produce price increases. Such policies directly constrict labor supply, as undocumented workers form a critical but precarious segment, prompting farmers to adapt via wage hikes—associated with a 21 higher probability amid shortages—and shifts in cultivation practices like or selection. The H-2A temporary visa program provides a partial , with certifying thousands of positions annually—ranking second or third nationally in usage—but its seasonal constraints and bureaucratic delays limit efficacy for year-round operations, covering only a fraction of needs despite record certifications exceeding 370,000 jobs nationwide in fiscal year 2022. Labor disputes persist amid these dynamics, including United Farm Workers (UFW) campaigns against growers like , where allegations surfaced in 2024-2025 of employer-paid anti-union protests in Visalia, countered by union claims of worker coercion. Enforcement-related tensions have spurred calls for strikes, such as a proposed three-day action in Ventura County following 2025 ICE arrests and a broader #Huelgaparaladignidad effort organized by farmworkers seeking dignity and stability. These conflicts highlight underlying frictions over wages, conditions, and legal status, with empirical data underscoring enforcement's causal role in supply disruptions over isolated union actions.

Fallow Land, Regulatory Costs, and Market Pressures

In recent years, significant portions of California's agricultural land have been left fallow due to water constraints and regulatory mandates. The Central Valley accounts for approximately 77% of the state's total fallowed acreage, contributing to about 88% of major anthropogenic dust events. Under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), implemented to curb overdraft in critically overdrafted basins, projections indicate that up to 1 million acres in the Central Valley may need to be idled by 2040 to achieve sustainability, as farmers reduce pumping to comply with local groundwater sustainability plans. During the 2021 , an additional 395,000 acres were fallowed beyond baseline levels, primarily in response to shortages that prompted increased reliance on—and subsequent limits on—. Water regulations, including those prioritizing environmental flows for species like the and enforcing SGMA's basin-wide pumping reductions, directly causal to heightened fallowing by restricting availability. Farmers often idle lower-value or water-intensive crops first, such as or , to minimize economic losses, but persistent cutbacks degrade and complicate future cultivation. In basins subject to SGMA, land fallowing is incentivized through economic , where operators shift to higher-value uses or simply forgo production on marginal parcels. These regulatory interventions, while aimed at long-term stability, exacerbate short-term idling without commensurate alternatives like expanded surface storage or . Regulatory compliance costs have surged, imposing a substantial burden on producers and contributing to decisions to idle land. A California Polytechnic State University analysis of production documented a 1,366% increase in per-acre regulatory costs, from $109 in 2006 to $1,600 in 2024, driven by mandates on water use, pesticide application, labor standards, and environmental reporting under frameworks like the (CEQA) and air quality districts. These costs now represent over 12% of total production expenses for many operations, outpacing crop value growth, which rose only 44% over the same period. Such escalations reduce farm viability, particularly for smaller operators, prompting land retirement or conversion to less regulated uses, as compliance diverts capital from productive investments. Market pressures compound these challenges, with depressed prices and global competition eroding margins amid rising input costs. Despite record gross agricultural sales exceeding $61.2 billion in 2024, many sectors face persistently low prices for staples like almonds, , and field crops, coupled with high interest rates and supply chain absorption of revenues. Imports from lower-cost producers in regions like and the undercut California outputs, where regulatory overhead inflates expenses by 20-30% relative to competitors. Farmland values declined in 2024, particularly in water-stressed areas, reflecting investor perceptions of untenable under combined regulatory and market strains.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.