We examine the half-century of changes in regional shares of production for the major commodity groupings—fruit and nut crops, vegetable crops, and dairy products.Statewide acreage of fruit and nut crops increased throughout the last half a century from about 1.5 million acres in 1950 to nearly 2 million in 1975 and 2.5 million in 2000. Yields per acre also increased, resulting in production increases far above that of just acreage alone. Figure 8 shows that the share of the state’s acreage fell in the Central Coast region from 18 to 8 percent and in the Southern California region from 26 to 8 percent. There were significant increases in the San Joaquin Valley ; many of the additional acres are located in newly developed areas supported by federal and state water-delivery systems. Commodity Example – Almonds. The shifting location of almond acreage reflects the shift of production southward in the Central Valley from the Sacramento to the San Joaquin Valley toward productive irrigated lands with newer cultural and management systems in the southern region. Urbanization displaced a large portion of the acreage in the Central Coast region.
In 1950 three of the “top five” almond producing counties were located in the Sacramento Valley. In 2000 the top five counties accounted for more than two-thirds of statewide acreage,pot blueberries and all were located in the San Joaquin Valley . Commodity Example – Oranges. In 1950 four out of every five acres of oranges were in Southern California . The early dominance of Southern California counties waned within the next two decades, and acreage was progressively displaced northward to the east side of the San Joaquin Valley as CVP water deliveries began in the 1950s. San Joaquin Valley acreage rose by 85,000 acres between 1950 and 1975. Tulare County alone now accounts for more than half of the state’s 207,000 acres of oranges, and 82 percent of the harvested acreage is now located in the San Joaquin Valley production region. Orange County, which had 60,109 acres of oranges in 1950, retained only 115 acres in 2000. Appendix Table A2, Part B, identifies harvested acreages of oranges for the top five counties from 1950 to 2000. In 1950 the top five counties accounted for 85 percent of orange acreage. Concentration in the top five counties is now 93 percent of statewide acreage.Data presented in Table 2 confirms two fundamental trends in California agriculture. The first is the decline in importance of Southern California in overall value. Los Angeles produced the highest value of production in 1949 but had disappeared from California’s top five by the 1960s. The second trend is the rising importance of the southern San Joaquin Valley; Fresno, Kern, and Tulare County accounted for 21 percent of California production in 1949 and 32 percent in 2000.
This reflects two things: the shifts of high-value commodities from Southern California, and the enormous productive potential of both east-side agriculture and the newly irrigated agricultural land on the west side of the valley. The share of total value coming from the top five counties increased sharply, from 35 percent to 49 percent, over the 50-year period. A few other points of note: California Department of Food and Agriculture preliminary data for 2001 put Tulare County in the number one spot, confirming the rising importance of dairy production to California. Monterey County has steadily increased its share of production, which rose from 3 percent in 1949 to 11 percent in 2000, reflecting a rapid increase in demand for fresh vegetables. Table 3 lists the top ten California counties by value of crop and animal production. In 1950 Los Angeles County was number one but was shortly thereafter overtaken by Fresno County, which dominated throughout the last four decades of the 20th Century . The same six San Joaquin Valley counties are included in the 1950 and 2000 rankings , but their relative rankings changed from decade to decade. There are three Southern California counties on both the 1950 ranking and the 2000 ranking, but they are entirely different counties. In 1950 Southern California counties included were Los Angeles, Imperial, and Orange; in 2000, they were San Diego, Riverside, and Ventura. Increased concentration of statewide agricultural production occurred over the past half decade. The top five counties accounted for about a third of the value of production in 1950 and nearly half in 2000. The top ten counties accounted for slightly more than half of statewide production in 1950 and 70 percent in 2000.
In summary, population growth and water availability have been the two dominant underlying forces affecting regional shifts in the location of agricultural production within the state. Rapid postwar and continuing urban and suburban population expansions forced relocation to interior valleys—first from the Los Angeles basin and later from the central coast and San Francisco Bay Area. Only high-valued vegetables, nursery, and specialty crops persist because of climatic and location advantages in the remaining Central Coast and Southern California areas of production. Trees and vines have, when possible, moved from Southern California and Central Coast regions to those interior areas with more favorable soils and water supplies and less population pressures. The most favored area for increased intensive production, including dairies, is the San Joaquin production region. In general, the Sacramento Valley has had fewer opportunities to change the mix of commodities produced. In some cases, commodities traditionally grown in the Sacramento Valley have also found more productive locales in the newer crop areas of the San Joaquin Valley. Now, at the start of the 21st Century, urban development is placing pressure on agricultural production in the northern San Joaquin and southern Sacramento Valleys, setting in motion further dynamics affecting the future location of the state’s agricultural production.California’s farms and ranches have always relied on exporting a significant share of total production to foreign markets, which recently amounted to a fifth or more of the total value of production. The value of California agricultural exports ranged from $6.5 to $7 billion over the five-year period 1997–2001. Table 4 shows export values and rankings for California’s most important agricultural export commodities for 1997 and 2001.9 The rankings of most important exported commodities did not change much between 1997 and 2001. Almonds and cotton, the top two export commodities, each with exports exceeding $600 million, had exports valued significantly less in 2001 than in 1997.
The largest percentage of increase in export values was for carrots and dairy ; decreases of 30 percent or more occurred for beef and products, hay, lemons, and cotton. An improvement in commodity prices from lower price levels could significantly increase the value of agricultural exports in the 21st Century. Exports have always been important to California’s farmers and ranchers. Over time, changes in the character of California agriculture have changed the kinds of animal and plant commodities significantly entering export markets. Table 5 compares the most recent list of the top 20 export commodities with that of two decades earlier . Comparable export values do not exist for these two periods,square plastic plant pots but the two lists of rankings do reflect the agricultural sector’s shift toward production of higher-valued dairy, fruits, tree nuts, and vegetables. Export outlets are crucial for many of California’s commodities. It is estimated that in 2001 the quantities exported were nearly half or more for rice, pistachios, almonds, prunes, and cotton produced on California’s farms and ranches . Note that the export of grapes and grape products appears as the first commod-ity in this table as the most important agricultural export. The aggregate of fresh grape, wine, raisin, and grape juice exports was more than $1 billion, easily topping the value of almonds or cotton alone . In 2001 17 percent of the quantity of production of the top 50 export commodities was exported. Economic conditions in East Asia and Europe are important to exporters . Shares of exports have not changed much over the recent past. Roughly a fifth is exported to each of the following markets: Japan, other East Asian nations, the European Union, Canada, and the rest of the world, including Mexico and Latin America. Changes in foreign economic conditions, trading relationships, and exchange rates significantly affect the bottom line for California producers.Land is an important farm asset for farmers and ranchers. Farm real estate values include land and buildings plus permanent appurtenances . USDA statistics show substantial appreciation over time in the value of land and buildings . The average value in California in 1950 was $154 per acre. The nominal value of $2,850 per acre in 2000 is 18.5 times larger than that for 1950. Real appreciation is about 250 percent when adjusted for inflation. There is, of course, wide variation in per-acre values depending on the location and the highest and best use of California’s agricultural land. Select vineyard and vegetable lands are considerably higher in value and have displayed greater appreciation than statewide averages. Table 11 shows USDA-estimated values for several broadly defined statewide types of California agricultural land in 2000. Statewide averages are of limited use in reflecting the large variation in values of land in various areas of the state even if they had similar highest and best uses. For example, the California Chapter of the American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers reported wine-grape values ranging from $3,500 to $180,000 per acre in 2000, along with considerable variation in opinions about market activity and price trends depending on location within the state. Vineyards in the North Coast region ranged in value from $12,000 to $180,000 per acre depending on other factors, such as location or root stock.
Sales information for irrigated crop land reveals a range from $600 to $49,000 per acre depending on location, highest and best use, and water source. Central Valley sales values range from a low for Kings County lake-bottom irrigated crop land to a high for choice irrigated crop land in San Joaquin County . Coastal irrigated land values were substantially greater. In Monterey County values ranged from a low of $9,000 per acre in the King City area to a range of $20,000 to $39,000 per acre in the prime vegetable production area of the lower Salinas Valley .Net farm incomes to California farmers and ranchers were constant and without much variation during the 1960s . For most of the 1990s, incomes ranged from $5 to $6 billion with considerable year-to-year variation, presenting a difficult financial environment for agricultural producers. California farmers experienced reduced levels of net farm incomes beginning in 1997, which was also true for the net farm incomes of all U.S. farmers. The two interim decades were expansive years, showing growth in production capacity statewide and cyclical variations that were mostly associated with offshore market opportunities gained and lost. California’s share of U.S. net farm income increased from 9 to 11 percent over the period 1960–2000. In contrast, U.S. net farm income growth was more gradual through the 1980s, except for a spurt in the early 1970s, due again to export market opportunities that were attractive to all U.S. crop and livestock producers. The more significant growth in net incomes occurred from the 1980s through the mid-1990s .Undertaking a prognosis of the future is an exercise fraught with danger. Surely the future is unpredictable in absolute terms, but we believe that one may learn a great deal about what forces may shape the future by understanding the importance of past and enduring features that have influenced the growth and development of California agriculture. Our stylized history suggests a set of historical factors that have influenced development of California agriculture over most of its history. We identify six general categories of drivers of importance—biophysical, technology and inputs, access to capital and labor inputs, human capital, demand factors, and public investment—and within these categories an even more specific total of 18 historical drivers. First, this chapter establishes a baseline for appreciating the historical influence of these identified drivers against which we can speculate on their future influences. Then, we give our evaluation of how important they were in each of the three historical periods—pre-20th Century, 1900–1950, and 1950–2000. Table 13 lists five major categories and 18 historical drivers.