>i vision of Agricultural Science UNIVERSITY Of CALIFORNI RENDS for MAJOR :alifornia crops ields, Acreages, and Production Areas I I \ RALD W. DEAN • C. O. McCORKLE, Jr CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL CIRCULAR 488 '—.TV (D W 1 North Coast 2 North Central 3 North East 4 Central Coast 5 Sacramento Valley 5A San Joaquin Valley 6 Mountain Area 8 Southern California y r^ «<.».%, i •^w "•»-*u« ■•••c.o '"*■«—« •*•••©*. © •«••*•« THESE ARE THE CROP-REPORTING DISTRICTS INTRODUCTION Information often requested is brought together here and summa- rized to show trends in the yields, acre- ages, and production areas of forty- two major California crops. The graphs show what the trends have been; the text tells why, summarizing the major factors behind the changes. The report serves two purposes: it records long-time trends and short- run changes, and it aids in under- standing future cropping possibilities. No attempt is made to forecast trends, except for some very short-run changes. Projection of future crop pat- - terns must await a more detailed study, for experience has shown that simple extension of trends is mis- leading. California produces too many crops for all to be covered here. This report t is therefore restricted to crops that in- dividually grossed more than eight million dollars in 1955 — but these add up to slightly over 90 per cent of the total crop value for that year. Com- pleteness of coverage varies, of course — from nearly all of citrus fruits and tree nuts, through 93 per cent of noncitrus fruits and 90 per cent of field crops (including food and feed grains), to only 84 per cent of vegetables. The figures herein vary in accuracy. They are quite exact for crops regu- lated by government programs (sugar beets, cotton, etc.) or by industry-wide programs (cling peaches, lemons, etc.); fairly exact for crops grown in quite restricted areas (mostly vegetables) and for crops that are slow in reaching production (tree crops); and least ex- act for crops grown throughout the state and subject to sizable year-to- year changes (barley, alfalfa, and sev- eral other field crops). The last group is extremely difficult to estimate with precision, and government agencies lack the resources to take a complete census of each crop. The sampling methods devised as the only practical alternative are subject to some error. Because the figures on year-to-year changes cannot be considered precise, the discussion generally follows longer trends. However, certain year-to-year changes are quite pronounced and are clearly explainable by unusual weath- er, acreage controls, or widespread in- cidence of pests or disease. The periods for which figures are available vary — with the crop and with counties or crop-reporting districts. Fruit and nut crops, which require relatively long periods for accurate de- piction of trends, fortunately have figures extending back to 1920. An- nual crops are shown for shorter periods (vegetables from 1933, and some field crops only from 1938). To indicate broad shifts in produc- ing areas and to compare the impor- tance of areas, trends are shown for principal districts. However, the meth- od of division — by crop-reporting dis- tricts — is not completely satisfactory: It presents a broad picture, but the reader must remember 1) that the dis- tricts follow county lines rather than climatic or economic boundaries; 2) that production of certain crops is ex- tremely localized, even within a dis- trict or a county or a portion thereof; and 3) that crops may shift within a crop-reporting district. However, such shifts are pointed out in the text. The accompanying map shows the crop-reporting districts of California. The graphs omit districts 1, 2, 3, and 6, which together account for less than one twentieth of the total value of all farm products sold in California. An occasional important crop in those areas is discussed in the text. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The source of most of the data used herein is the California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. The au- thors wish to thank personnel in that agency who made certain unpublished county data available as a supplement to published materials. In the Depart- ment of Agricultural Economics, Da- vis, Roger Fox was especially helpful in compiling data and preparing graphs. Finally, the authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of Univer- sity of California staff members and agricultural leaders throughout the state who provided information of help in interpreting the material. Of course, the authors accept final re- sponsibility for any errors of fact or interpretation. CONTENTS DECIDUOUS FRUITS Apples 2 Apricots 4 Cherries (Sweet) 8 Grapes 11 Peaches (Clingstone) 15 Peaches (Freestone) 17 Pears 20 Plums 23 Prunes 26 CITRUS FRUITS Valencia Oranges 29 Navel Oranges 31 Lemons 34 TREE NUTS Almonds 38 Walnuts 41 VEGETABLE CROPS Asparagus 44 Cantaloups 45 Carrots 48 Celery 50 Lettuce 54 Potatoes 60 Strawberries 63 Tomatoes (Fresh) 65 Tomatoes (Processing) 69 FIELD CROPS Alfalfa Hay 71 Barley 73 Corn 75 Cotton 77 Rice 79 Grain Sorghums 81 Sugar Beets 83 Wheat 85 THE AUTHORS: Gerald W. Dean is Assistant Professor of Agricultural Economics and Assistant Agricultural Economist in the Experiment Station and on the Giannini Foundation. C. O. McCorkle, Jr., is Associate Professor of Agricultural Economics and Associate Agricultural Economist in the Experi- ment Station and on the Giannini Foundation. MARCH, 1960 DECIDUOUS FRUITS Changes in bearing and nonbearing acreage California produces less than 10 per cent of the nation's apples, but ranks among the top four states in production ; in the West it is second only to Wash- ington. Both summer and fall varieties are produced. The principal summer variety is Gravenstein. Before World War II about half of the California apple crop was processed. Over 80 per cent of that half was dried. Apple production continues to exceed demand in the fresh outlets — so prices are not favorable to growers, and fresh sales of California apples have declined to less than one third of production. Today nearly 80 per cent of the apples processed are dried or are canned as applesauce, in about equal proportions. The bearing acreage of apples in Cal- ifornia has declined steadily since 1926 and now stands at less than half the lev- el reached in that year. Bearing acreage has declined in all producing districts in the state — for a number of reasons, but most important has probably been the presence of more profitable alternatives. Contributing factors have been insuffi- cient winter chilling and rising water costs. Nonbearing acreage declined dras- tically from 1920 to 1937, remained rel- atively stable through the war period, and has fluctuated moderately in the recent decade. Shifts in location of production Apples require a growing season that is long and cool, permitting slow devel- opment of the crop. High summer tem- peratures cause sunburn and some damage to the fruit. Thus, the interior valleys and southern California are con- sidered suitable apple districts only at higher elevations with moderate summer temperatures and sufficient winter chilling. These requirements have centered the apple industry in the Sebastopol area of Sonoma County and the Watsonville area of Santa Cruz County, where about 85 per cent of the total value of apples in California is produced. Commercial acreage is found in several foothill counties from Butte south through Tu- lare, and also in the Yucaipa district, though the effects of moderate winters on yields have drastically reduced acre- age in the southern counties. In both the north coast and foothill districts there has been a significant shift to Red and Double Red Delicious, both fresh shipping varieties. Some drying varieties have been topworked to shipping var- ieties. Apples produced in the southern counties have favorable local markets. Bearing acreage in the central coast counties has gradually declined. Non- bearing acreage, however, has increased in the last three years, primarily reflect- ing plantings of new varieties. In south- ern California both bearing and non- bearing acreage continues downward. Trends in yields and production Yields per acre have increased since about 1940. The increase has offset de- clining acreage so that total production is little affected. Since apple trees tend to bear heavily in alternate years, yields and total production fluctuate greatly from year to year. The relatively low level of [2] 55,000 50,000 - i 1 1 APPLES: Bearing acreage by districts, California 2,000 1 1 i 1 1 1 APPLES: Nonbearing acreage by districts, California ' ' l l I I I I i I I I i i N I I t I I I I — c 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 Year 1945 1955 3] no 100 90 To 70 c o 60 50 40 30 20 10 - / ' ' 1 ! Production — ? .fl A , A/1 A A / v v if APPLES: Production and yield per bearing acre, California Yield (commercial districts only) ■ I I l I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 100 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 Year yields in the mid-thirties mainly reflects and some shift to heavier-yielding vari- poor care of orchards because of low eties. Potential sources of future yield in- prices. Recent increases in yields prima- creases are virus-free rootstocks and new rily reflect improved care of orchards varieties. Changes in bearing and nonbearing acreage California produces over 90 per cent of the apricots grown in the United States, of which about 10 per cent is sold fresh. The fresh product is primarily from producing areas with climates fa- voring early maturity. Most of the Cal- ifornia crop is canned or dried; production in other states primarily en- ters fresh markets. Out-of-state produc- tion is late enough not to compete with California fresh shipments. In the early and mid-twenties heavy planting of new trees was encouraged by 4] 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 5 50,000 o o> •E 40,000 6 « CD 30,000 10,000 1 1 1 1 APRICOTS: Bearing acreage by districts, California State Southern California ^»^ ^oouuiern ^aiiTorma - ^ ^ '""V^*"* — — _J — ^ n J° a( I u ' n Valley •Sacramento Valley I i i i i 1 i i i i I .1 i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i iTT i i T 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 Year 1945 1950 1953 33,000 30,000 27,000 24,000 21,000 M 0> o 18,000 I O 15,000 M C Z 12,000 9,000 6,000 3,000 ! i i i i r APRICOTS: Nonbearing acreage by districts, California Central Coast / T"\ y Southern "%'v ^California N.^ I i i i i Sacramento Valley I i r i i i i 1920 1925 1930 rTT"r"r ,, fT rr Pi^d^MMyia 1935 1940 1945 1950 Year 1955 [5 (such ijo^s) ajoo 6uuDacj jad p\B\\ (suo* jjotjs QOO'l) uoipnpoij high grower returns for dried fruits in export markets. During this expansion, apricots were planted in some areas not well adapted to their production. Bear- ing acreages have declined steadily since the late twenties. Low returns to growers during the depression years contributed to the steady decline in bearing and non- bearing acreage. The rate of decline in- creased as a result of reduced plantings during the war years and extensive pull- ing of older trees. Nonbearing acreage continued to decline until 1955. Since then, increases have been significant. Shifts in location of production The Central Coast area, specifically the Santa Clara Valley extending south to the Hollister district, has been pre- dominant in apricot acreage for 30 years. The climate is largely responsible. The apricot, an early bloomer, is subject to severe damage where spring frosts are common, and is subject to quality loss where summer temperatures are high. Cold locations or areas with frequent spring and summer fog are also unsuit- able. Areas near San Francisco Bay, particularly the sheltered valleys in Santa Clara, Contra Costa, Solano, San Benito, and Monterey counties, have thus been commonly selected. Acreage in the Central Coast area has declined, though it still accounts for well over half of the state's total acreage. Causes of the decline have been subdivisions and, in some localities, increased interest in vegetable production. Acreage in the Sacramento Valley (chiefly at Winters and Fairfield) has remained nearly constant for the last ten years at only slightly less than peak acre- age. These areas are the early shipping districts, characterized by relatively warm springs that ripen fruit before the high summer temperatures. The San Joaquin Valley area rose to major importance in the early thirties and then declined steadily, though acre- age remains significant in the Brentwood and Tracy districts. Ignorance of the limited adaptability of apricots was prob- ably responsible for this early expansion and subsequent decline. Recent increases in nonbearing acreage in the San Joa- quin Valley are confined to the Tracy- Patterson district, where interest is largely in production for processing. It is questionable whether this district can mature fruit as early as such areas as Winters, but may possibly produce ripe fruit earlier than the Brentwood region. Southern California, an important producer of apricots before 1930, is now less important. Principal southern Cali- fornia districts were near Hemet, in Riverside County, and in southeastern Ventura County, near Moorpark. In- terest remains low in those areas, though new plantings have recently increased in all other districts, particularly in the northern San Joaquin Valley. Trends in yields and production Apricot yields vary greatly from year to year. Alternate bearing is partly re- sponsible; so is unfavorable weather dur- ing blossoming or ripening. Yields have increased gradually, and more markedly since the early forties. The reason is partly that commercial acreage is con- centrated in better-adapted areas and that old trees have been pulled; an addi- tional factor may be the accumulated results of many minor improvements in cultural practices. Production from year to year strongly reflects the variation in yield. The lack of a definite trend in production indicates that decline in acreage has been approxi- mately offset by increasing yield. With some new planting in favorable districts and the bulk of removals in areas where trees are relatively old, some increase in total production might be forthcoming, but the 300,000-ton crops experienced in the mid-forties are not probable in the near future. [7] Changes in bearing and nonbearing acreage Commercial production of sweet cher- ries in the United States centers in two areas: the Pacific Coast (California, Ore- gon, and Washington) and Michigan. Utah, Idaho, Montana, and New York produce minor quantities. California pro- duction accounts for 30 to 40 per cent of the value of U. S. sweet cherry produc- tion. These cherries are used primarily for fresh consumption, though signifi- cant quantities are canned or brined. The latter are used to produce maraschino cherries. Sour cherries are also produced in the United States, though mainly east of the Rocky Mountains, for pie fruit. The bearing acreage of cherries in California rose rapidly between 1920 and the peak year of 1938 (almost 15,000 acres) and then declined steadily until 1950 (to about 9,500 acres) . Nonbearing acreage peaked in 1926, declined dras- tically until the mid-forties, and has since expanded rapidly, reflecting favorable grower returns. Continuing favorable prices can be expected to result in further plantings and increased production, bar- ring a drastic change in rate of pullings. Shifts in location of production The Santa Clara Valley, on the Central Coast, and the Lodi-Linden district, in the San Joaquin Valley, have been the centers of California's cherry produc- tion. Small acreages are reported in Alameda, Contra Costa, El Dorado, Monterey, Napa, Riverside, Sacramento, Santa Cruz, Solano, Sonoma, and Sutter counties. The rather exacting climatic and soil requirements of the cherry tree are met most readily in selected locations within these counties. Soils should be the light and well-drained loams character- istic of alluvial sedimentary soils. Some foothill soils are considered acceptable; clay and adobe soils generally are not, though cherries are being grown on heavier soils on rootstocks adapted to them. The physical requirements of the cherry tree make readily apparent the development of a major segment of Cali- fornia's cherry industry in the Santa Clara Valley. But a rapid industrial and urban growth on favorable sites in this area obscures its future as a cherry pro- ducer. There has been some new planting there, near San Martin and Gilroy, but there is some doubt that bearing acreage will be maintained. The Lodi-Linden area, in the San Joaquin Valley, is one of the oldest cherry-growing districts in the state, and expanding rapidly. Soils and climate there are particularly well suited to cherry production. Growers moving from the Santa Clara Valley are respon- sible for much of this expansion. The area south of the Delta — from Tracy- Patterson, on the west, to Manteca- Turlock. on the east — may conceivably become an important cherry-producing region. In southern California, Yucaipa and Beaumont have been important in pro- duction for the local market and fresh shipment, but have gradually declined. Attempts are being made to increase pro- duction, primarily for local sale, through varieties better adapted to this area. In the Sacramento Valley, limited acreage suitable for cherries is found along the Sacramento River, but higher returns from other crops have resulted in a continual decrease in acreage since 1930. No expansion is anticipated there. Trends in yields and production Yields of cherries fluctuate widely from year to year, primarily as a result [8] 4,000 - CHERRIES: Bearing acreage by districts, California Central Coast — > ^» San Joaauin Valley-"^"^^ Sf?^ '''A'\ ^■Sacramento Valley L .^r^** i .E 3,000 o 0) "I 2,500 o Z 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 i i i i i r CHERRIES: Nonbearing acreage by districts, California State / / ..•• \ •' / Sacramento // ^ // ^ * Valley I l I i I I I I I I 1 I I I .\^. ...... I I I I ^^r^^-< JL_I -*-^ / \ S San Joaquin Valley ^^pp ^f.^^^ ^^ ^^i... 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 [9] (|L|6!a/A aiJDj ijsajj'suoj jjoljs) qjdd 6uiJDaq jad p\a\\ 1 n CM ~- 1 1 1 v^^^ _ k — ^*> *> _ -X V _ - > — o 'E <^; — Q. -o > C r-i < < - 1 ction ( n - 3 -o o j> > CL \ LU - LU i • X u k v, — - 1 1 1 1 1 — D >- (4H6jaM wjdj i^sajj 'suoj jjoi|s) uouonpojj of weather conditions. Being an early fruit, cherries are subject to severe dam- age from frost at blossom time, and from rain during ripening. Since the mid-thirties, yields of sweet cherries have increased at a rapid rate. The annual average yield in 1952-56 was 3.3 tons, compared with 1.7 tons in 1935- 39. Improved disease recognition and control, soil and water management, and care of trees are important factors con- tributing to this increase. Future yield increases may come from recent plant- ings in areas well adapted to their cul- ture. Still further increases may result as virus-resistant rootstocks and new varieties are introduced. The rapid increase in yield has more than offset the reduction in bearing acre- age, the net result being a gradual up- ward trend in total production. With nonbearing acreage almost 28 per cent of total acreage and the average yield rising, production of sweet cherries in California can be expected to increase. The large year-to-year fluctuations, how- ever, prevent forecasting production for any given year. Changes in bearing and nonbearing acreage California produces 90 per cent of the United States grape crop. Three general varietal classes are produced — raisin, wine, and table grapes. However, some varieties in raisin and table classes are multipurpose and may go to two or all three outlets, depending on relative supplies and prices. Hence, the several markets are highly interrelated. Develop- ments in one segment of the industry are felt almost immediately in the other seg- ments. From 1920 to 1956, raisin varie- ties composed over half the total Cali- fornia production; the remainder was about equally table and wine varieties. Since some table and raisin varieties go into wine, nearly one half of the annual grape crop is usually crushed for wine and brandy. Another 30 per cent goes to raisins, and the rest to fresh use. In re- cent years, only about 15 per cent of the California grape crop has been exported, mostly raisins exported under subsidy by the U. S. government. There are only three or four years be- tween planting and commercial produc- tion, so changes in bearing acreage lag but briefly behind changes in nonbearing acreage. High prices of fresh grapes from 1919 through 1922, and of raisins from 1919 through 1921, tremendously stimu- lated California nonbearing grape acre- age in the early twenties. Then excessive supplies and depressed prices reduced new plantings. As a result, bearing acre- age peaked in the late twenties, declined until the mid-thirties, and then held rela- tively stable as new plantings offset vine removals for about a decade. In the mid- forties, high prices encouraged new plantings, and nonbearing acreage again increased sharply. Prices an:l nonbearing acreage declined in the late forties, fol- lowed by a decline in bearing acreage since 1950. Depressed prices and burden- some surpluses in the postwar years can be traced partly to loss of the large pre- war export market for raisins. Further- more, domestic raisin consumption (per capita and total) has declined while fresh grape consumption has increased only [in 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 Central Coast Southern California. f. _ Sacramento Valley i i i i I i i i i i i i i i i"r*i"i"r , i"n , T , fM , vT , v < i"^_ V : *r' i - o 'E §0 — ~o *\ — "■" U ©* u — o 40T D> c — ha o o ■"™ _D » -a c o - — c o <<** — u D ,y> - 2 CL cr — to — LU "O |/ c Q. ""■"■ ^^_ o < a: L-^ u — o _f ♦ 3 O - C. v^ a. — I ^^^^»w * ?, - o o >- o o — (suoj ijoijs u o i j j i lu ) uoipnpojjj CLINGSTONE REACHES Changes in bearing and nonbearing acreage Clingstone peaches come into bearing earlier than most other tree crops, usually in the fifth year. Hence, any change in total bearing acreage in the state in any year depends on the net balance between plantings about four years old and re- movals of old or diseased trees. Heavy plantings in the early twenties caused a peak in nonbearing acreage in 1924, resulting in rapid expansion of bearing acreage in the late twenties. Con- sequent overproduction and low prices in 70, 65, 60, 55, 50, t/> 45, 0) 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 — I CLINGSTONE PEACHES: Bearing acreage by districts, California 'Sacramento Valle> ,£- San Joaquin Valley y 1920 1925 1935 1940 Year 1945 1950 1955 25,000 CLINGSTONE PEACHES: Nonbearing acreage by districts, California 5,000 .•***•.. N — - *.^. Y ' **m^~" ^ Southern California I I I I I I MM I I I I I | ±=t J-U-JL 1920 1925 1945 1950 1955 [15] the late twenties and early thirties dis- couraged new plantings, and nonbearing acreage declined to a low of 6,000 acres in 1934. Nonbearing acreage has since increased, with the result that bearing acreage stabilized in the late thirties and then gradually increased. Increases in nonbearing acreage since 1954, resulting largely from favorable prices, indicate that bearing acreage will probably rise in the next few years. Shifts in location of production The major producing districts in Cali- fornia are almost totally confined to the interior valleys. Acreage in the Sacra- mento Valley centers at Marysville-Yuba City, extending northward to Live Oak and southward to Rio Oso along the Sacramento River. Three distinct dis- tricts are found in the San Joaquin Val- ley: Stockton, Modesto-Merced, and Kingsburg-Visalia-Lindsay. The south- ern California district consists of two relatively small commercial districts — one east of Redlands and one near Hemet. The districts in the San Joaquin Val- ley are of major importance, accounting for nearly two thirds of the bearing acre- age of clingstone peaches. Expansion in state acreage since 1940 can be accounted for entirely by increases in the San Joa- quin Valley districts. Any further state expansion is likely to take place in these districts. Soils and climate there are well adapted to fruit production. The south- ern California areas have declined stead- ily and are now an insignificant portion of the state total. Low yields and small fruits have been maj or factors in this de- cline. Southern California clingstone peaches do not size well, and have always posed a marketing problem. Under pref- erential terms of the marketing order, southern California producers are al- lowed to market a peach of smaller diam- eter than producers in other areas are permitted. Delayed foliation may be the major cause of the low yields and small sizes. Lack of interest in new plantings in this area indicates that southern Cali- fornia will decline even further in cling- stone peach production. Heavy plantings in the twenties in the CLINGSTONE PEACHES: Production and yield per bearing acre, California • / A ' Production AW V V V Yield per harvested acre. Green drop: 1950-15%; 1952-15%; 1954-17%. Estimated production without reen drop I I I I ' 1935 1940 Year [16] Sacramento Valley resulted in a peak bearing acreage around 1930. Fewer new plantings and more removals reduced the bearing acreage in the Valley to around 16,000 acres in the late thirties. Heavy pulling in the early thirties re- flects an inability of many producers to withstand the low prices of the depres- sion period. Less important was the fact that the rapid expansion of the twenties included plantings on some sites not adapted to peach growing. Since the middle thirties, total bearing acreage of clingstone peaches in the Sacramento Valley has remained nearly constant. Possible expansion in the area is some- what restricted by the acreage adapted to peach growing. The profitability of other crops, such as processing tomatoes, may also be a factor limiting future ex- pansion of peach acreage in this region. Trends in yields and production Yields per bearing acre of Cali- fornia clingstone peaches have increased strongly, nearly tripling in the last 30 years. The primary reasons are improved cultural practices, such as disease con- trol, irrigation management, and fertili- zation. However, improved varieties and younger orchards also exert a consider- able influence on yields. Shifts of bear- ing acreage into the high-yielding dis- tricts of the San Joaquin Valley, as indi- cated previously, also increase state average yields. Year-to-year variations in yields are caused mainly by weather variations and some tendency for alter- nate bearing. During the twenties, both bearing acre- age and yield increased, resulting in a production peak in 1930. Between 1930 and 1935 acreage declines more than off- set yield increases, with total production reduced. Since the late thirties, with both yield and bearing acreage increasing, total production has increased. Produc- tion will likely increase further, from prospective increases in both bearing acreage and average yields. Changes in bearing and nonbearing acreage For the U. S. as a whole, most free- stone peaches move into the fresh market. In California, in contrast, about 55 per cent of the freestone crop is used for dry- ing or canning, although the trend is toward a greater proportion in the fresh market. Prices received by California producers have been lower than those obtained by producers in other states. The shift toward more fresh shipment in California has narrowed this price gap. Low relative prices partially explain a downward trend in bearing acreage from the early twenties to late thirties. Sharp price declines discouraged new plantings and increased the rate of orchard remov- als. Stronger prices in the middle thirties encouraged some new plantings and al- lowed bearing acreage to stabilize from about 1938 to the end of World War II. After a brief postwar decline, bearing acreage again stabilized — at about 32,500 acres. Increases in nonbearing acreage in 1955 and 1956 indicate a probable future increase in bearing acre- age. [17] 60,000 40,000 £ 35,000 u O o 30,000 c D CO 25,000 20,000 15,000 - 5,000 — •-s State FREESTONE PEACHES: Bearing acreage by districts, California San Joaquin Valley^ ^^ Southern California I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1935 1940 Year 1950 1955 4,000 2,000 ^^-^ ^/ij-San Joaquin Valley .• *i»s-»Sacramento Valley Southern California i l I i I i i i i I i i i i I ' i i ' I i i i i*1 I i i i li f'l I 1930 1935 1940 Year 1950 1955 [18] (suoj *joi]s) aJDo 6uuoaq jad ppix (such jjous 000 '00 1) uoi.pnpojj Shifts in location of production Most of the decline in bearing acre- age of California freestones has been in the San Joaquin Valley districts ( Fresno-Porterville and Modesto-Mer- ced), though the Sacramento Valley dis- tricts (principally Winters and Fairfield) and southern California (Redlands, Ban- ning, and Ontario) have also declined. Just as most of the decline was in the San Joaquin Valley, any future expansions are expected to take place there. Recent increases in the Valley have been chiefly in Fresno, Kern, and Tulare counties, where early-maturing varieties command a premium price. The San Joaquin Val- ley has a seasonal advantage in the fresh market, primarily because of a relatively long growing season. Trends in yields and production Little trend in yields of California freestone peaches can be observed from 1920 to 1935. Improving prices during the late thirties and World War II led growers to adopt improved cultural prac- tices (such as better disease control), substantially increasing yields. Since World War II, yields have been highly irregular; only since 1954 have they at- tained the previous record high of 1946. Future shifts to new early-maturing va- rieties may even reduce yields of free- stones, but price advantages are expected to more than offset any yield reduction. Year-to-year yield fluctuations result pri- marily from weather variations and a slight tendency toward alternate bearing. Freestone production in California declined between 1920 and 1935. as acre- age declined and yields fluctuated about a constant level. Then yield increases more than offset acreage decline, and production reached an all-time peak in 1946. After the early postwar drop in acreage, freestone yields and production once again started upward. Changes in bearing and nonbearing acreage In the past, the Bartlett variety has dominated the California pear industry. Between 85 and 90 per cent of the state's total bearing acreage has been devoted to Bartletts, with the rest planted largely to "late" fall and winter varieties. The distance from eastern consuming centers, coupled with the perishable nature of the fruit, has channeled a growing propor- tion of the California crop into the canned market. Thus, prices to Califor- nia growers have usually been lower than the national average. The sharp rise in bearing acreage of pears during the twenties and early thir- ties reflects a rapid rate of new plantings in the early twenties in response to high prices and returns during the rapid growth of the California pear industry. Overexpansion of planted acreage and production, together with depression conditions, resulted in low returns to growers during the thirties. Thus, both nonbearing and bearing acreage de- clined sharply until World War II. Plant- ings since then have increased slightly, probably in response to several years of high postwar prices to growers (in 1946, 1948, and 1951, for example). The rate of decline in bearing acreage has slack- ened since 1950. As a result of recent plantings, bearing acreage may stabilize or even increase slightly in the next few years. 20 80,000 70,000 60,000 £ 50,000 u o o> 40,000 o <£ 30,000 20,000 10,000 PEARS: Bearing acreage by districts, California State >^" ..•••.^Sacramento Valley *—• ^*~^5~ Mountain Area '*' Ti i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i i i i i i I i i i i I i i i i l 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 Year 40,000 36,000 32,000 28,000 2 24,000 o 20,000 16,000 12,000 8,000 4,000 PEARS: Nonbearing acres by districts, California Sacramento Valley x Mountain Area —j^Jp'^i^. m ^ *-— -» ^_ i i i i I i i i i I i i HS^lS lSlSiiiS^SSSsSi^sSSSS: 1925 1930 1935 1940 Year 1945 1950 1955 Shifts in location of production Changes in the Central Coast area have been the major element in both the rise and the decline of California's pear acre- age. The Central Coast area comprises two major districts — San Jose and Lake- port-Kelseyville — and several less impor- tant localities, such as Sebastopol, Fair- field, Napa, and Watsonville. Most of the decline in the Central Coast in the past 25 years has been in the northern Santa Clara Valley, near San Jose. In the ear- lier years the decline was caused prima- rily by low returns; more recently, sub- division for housing and industrializa- tion have cut into bearing acreage. Bear- ing acreages in the Sacramento Valley (river district north and south of Court- [21] (such iJOLjs) 3JDD 6uuoaq Jdd pp'X o (suo) jjoijs OOO'D uojpopoij land and the Yuba City district) and the mountain area (Colfax-Auburn-Loomis and Placerville districts) have remained nearly constant for the past 15 years. However, recent new plantings (particu- larly in the mountain area) can be ex- pected to increase bearing acreage in the near future. Trends in yields and production Pear yields from 1920 to the mid-thir- ties remained at about a constant level, with only year-to-year fluctuations. Since the mid-thirties, however, yields per acre have trended strongly upward. Most of the yield increase can be attributed to control of fire blight and the use of pre- harvest sprays; new varieties have not been an important factor. Increasing ma- turity of existing orchards and more widespread irrigation have contributed to increased yields. Year-to-year yield fluctuations are caused by an alternate- bearing tendency and variability in weather conditions. Yield increases over the past 20 years have more than offset the sharp acreage declines. As a result, total production has increased. Production is expected to continue upward in the next few years as acreage stabilizes or increases and yields trend upward. PLUMS Changes in bearing and nonbearing acreage About nine tenths of commercial plum production in the United States is con- centrated in a few small areas of Cali- fornia. Plums are a highly perishable fruit, but about 95 per cent of the crop goes to fresh consumption. A large num- ber of widely differing varieties are mar- keted successively throughout the season (May to September), depending on ma- turity dates. Supplies of other fruits are small when the early varieties are sold, but increase substantially after June, when midseason and late plums are shipped. Recent years have seen a shift toward greater production of early va- rieties of plums, partly as a result of competition with other fruits in the late- season markets. High prices received by plum growers after World War I led to an expansion of new plantings that continued into the early twenties, with bearing acreage in- creasing until 1929. However, lower plum prices and reduced plantings in the late twenties and early thirties led to a decline, first in nonbearing acreage and then in bearing acreage. During World War II, increased demand and higher prices again stimulated new plantings. After the war, nonbearing acreage dropped, with the result that bearing acreage began to decline slowly after 1950. Heavier rates of new plantings in 1955 and 1956, if continued, can be ex- pected to stabilize or possibly increase bearing acreage in the near future, un- less producing orchards are heavily pulled. Shifts in location of production Since the mid-thirties, bearing acreage of plums has declined in the mountain area (Loomis- Auburn area of Placer County) and in the Yuba City area in Sacramento Valley. Bearing acreage has increased in the San Joaquin Valley, par- ticularly in the fruit belt from Clovis to Porterville. The Arvin area of Kern County and the Linden district of San [23 32,000 30,000 28,000 26,000 24,000 22,000 20,000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 PLUMS: Bearing acreage by districts, California Mountain Area »^!_3~San Joaquin Valley I I I I 1 I I I l I I I I I I i l i I I 1920 1930 1935 1940 Year 1950 1925 1935 1940 Year 1950 1955 Joaquin County are also important com- mercial plum-producing areas in the San Joaquin Valley. San Joaquin Valley pro- ducers, besides obtaining a tonnage per acre that is greater than average, grow a larger proportion of early-maturing va- rieties, which on the average command more favorable prices. Even with the same varieties, the San Joaquin Val- ley area permits earlier ripening than the Placer area or the Sacramento Valley. The geographic shifts in production in- dicated above are expected to continue, as evidenced by increased new plantings in 1955 and 1956, mainly in the San Joaquin Valley. It is possible that acre- age in the Placer district and the Sacra- mento Valley may stabilize as these areas [24] (suoj *jol|s) 3J3D 6uuodq Jod pp!A o c *- ^o o m *~ o o »** U ,, o 0) -jD ka OL -o 0) >* o -o ■<- O w. 0. »n CO Cr> 2 (suoj 4.104s OOO'l) uoipnpojj concentrate on late varieties. Competi- tion from the San Joaquin Valley is not expected to develop during the late sea- son, when growers in that area become engaged in grape harvest. Trends in yields and production Little trend is evident in yields in 1920-35, but yields increased between 1935 and the mid-forties. For the next decade, yields fluctuated widely near a constant level. In 1955-56, yields appear to have resumed an uptrend. The primary reason for the increased yields has been the shift in location of production to the higher-yielding San Joaquin Valley. Fa- vorable weather conditions from the mid- thirties to mid-forties helped the steady yield increases during that period. Wide annual yield fluctuations in other periods reflect variable weather conditions and the alternate-bearing tendency of plums. Yield increases in the late thirties and early forties more than counterbalanced the decline in bearing acreage; thus, pro- duction has increased. With bearing acre- age stabilizing or possibly increasing in the next few years and average yields ex- pected to rise, increased production ap- pears in prospect. PRUNES Changes in bearing and nonbearing acreage California produces nearly 90 per cent of the prunes grown in the United States, with other western states contributing the remainder. The growing habits of the tree and climatic requirements for ripen- ing the fruit confine its production to areas where the spring and summer are warm, dry, and clear. However, winter chilling is important to normal blossom- ing and leaf bud emergence. The interior valleys are well suited to prune produc- tion, as are some of the coastal valleys where fog is not excessive. In southern California the winters are generally too moderate for commercial production of prunes. Bearing acreage in California in- creased over 50 per cent in 1920-30, re- flecting extensive new plantings during the first half of that decade. A rapidly expanding export market for dried fruits, together with excellent grower prices, largely accounts for this increase. Non- bearing acreage dropped drastically in the latter half of the twenties, bringing about a steady decline in bearing acre- age from 1930 to date. Depressed grower prices in the late twenties and thirties worked against expansion, and pullings exceeded new plantings during that pe- riod. A rise in nonbearing acreage since 1954 indicates an increase in bearing acreage during the early sixties unless the rate of pullings increases. Both the Central Coast and Sacramento Valley, the two prune-producing districts, have experienced similar changes in bearing and nonbearing acreage until recently. Shifts in location of production The Central Coast counties of Santa Clara (Santa Clara Valley), Sonoma (Santa Rosa-Healdsburg), and Napa (Napa-St. Helena), have accounted for about 80 per cent of the total state bear- [26] 180,000 160.000 80.000 60,000 40,000 20,000 k* PRUNES: Bearing acreage by districts, California Sacramento Valley,. I I I I I I I l I I I I I I 1 l I I I I 1 I I I | I l I I I I I I I I 1925 1930 1935 1940 Year 1945 1950 1955 PRUNES: Nonbearing acreage by districts, California 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 Year 1950 1955 [27] (suoi 4-ioqs) 3JDD 6uiJDaq Jad pp!X ^-1 /i c o ^. s m •n o» o — c la ^O o U "— o of __ «n o* u ^~ o — CD c — D O _D Q. •*• -o •~ 0) >N -T5 C D C o o ■^ ■n u o> 3 m — -o o Km a CL 0) >- to LU Z VO 3 CO C£ o* CL -o o o CO >- Oo (suo* jjous 000'L) uoipnpoij ing acreage. Since 1950, importance has shifted from the coastal counties to the Sacramento Valley, where acreage has remained almost constant while it has declined on the coast. Major plantings in the Sacramento Valley center between Gridley and Rio Oso. Plantings are ex- tensive north of Colusa and above the Sacramento River between Orland and Chico. Scattered plantings at Fairfield, Vacaville, and Woodland account for nearly all the remaining commercial acreage in the Valley. Urbanization of the Santa Clara Valley has been chiefly responsible for this shift, though disease problems in Sonoma and Napa counties have also contributed. New plantings in recent years in the Sacramento Valley, primarily from Marysville to Red Bluff, account for a re- cent upturn in nonbearing acreage. This upturn may partially reduce the rate of decline in total prune acreage caused by continued pullings in the Santa Clara Valley Trends in yields and production Yields of prunes have gradually in- creased in the past 35 years, though year- to-year fluctuations have been large. The shift in location of production can be expected to increase state average yields since yields are greater in the central valley than in the coastal counties. Be- cause of a 10-year lag between planting date and commercial production, this shift will not be reflected in state average yields for some time unless low-produc- ing trees are pulled at a greater rate. The upward trend in production in 1920-38 partly reflects yield increases as trees matured. The trend since has been slightly downward, as acreage de- clines more than offset yield increases. If acreage stabilizes and yields increase as expected, total production could in- crease slightly, though future changes in total prune acreage are difficult to pre- dict. [28] CITRUS FRUITS Changes in bearing and nonbearing acreage Changes in the California orange in- dustry are closely related to develop- ments in orange production and market- ing in other sections of the United States, particularly in Florida. Especially in- fluenced are California Valencias, which have been shipped for fresh consumption during May-October, while fresh ship- ments from Florida are at a seasonal low. Therefore, California Valencia growers have generally received favor- able prices and returns. New plantings during the twenties and early thirties ex- 160,000 40,000 20,000 VALENCIA ORANGES: Acreage by districts, California San Joaquin Valley. I i I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I i 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 Year 30,000 25,000 - VALENCIA ORANGES: Nonbearing acreage by districts, California 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 Year 1945 1950 1955 [29] (saxoq) 8jdd 6uuoacj jad pp| A ooooooooo oooooo CO <0 ^"CNO 00O'^-fNOe©>0'^ , CN CMCNCNCNCNi— >— *- — •— 1 1 1 II 1 l/l 1 I 1 1 i i 1 vl ^^^^ o 'c - J> _ ^^ •^ "o - k> 0) — ^^^* ^ ' ^^^^^^^^^ a. _ /^'aS "a> - c • > O 1 1 -a •■ z ! i c o - - 1 ^c c o — * *^v u 3 - ^^> -13 2 - •^**. Q_ - Cr> _ LU O z — < O _ /> < _ f i u - kj^ LU .J — *> < > - "^^ZL <"." — 3 »*-> — -o ^^^ < — V. — >. > — ^ f - ^ V - > > - "ii I I r^ -r 1 — D a; >- o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o CO o CO o CM m o m (saxocjooot) uojpnpojj paneled bearing acreage through World War II. Since then the picture for Cali- fornia Valencias has changed drastically. The development of frozen orange con- centrate — and the resultant boom in acreage and production of processing oranges in Florida — has reduced re- turns to California Valencia producers. Frozen concentrate is now widely ac- cepted as a year-round substitute for fresh orange juice, sharply reducing the seasonal advantages of California Valen- cias. With demand reduced and produc- tion costs higher than in Florida, the total bearing acreage of California Va- lencias has dropped off sharply in the past decade. Nonbearing acreage has also declined to the lowest level on record. Thus the bearing acreage of California Valencias, at least in the near future, can be expected to decline even further. Shifts in location of production Nearly all of the change in bearing acreage of California Valencias can be attributed to changes in southern Cali- fornia. Principal districts are Ventura County, Orange County, and Corona- Arlington-Redlands. Bearing acreage in the San Joaquin Valley (mainly the Woodlake-Porterville district of Tulare County) has been constant since the early twenties. The sharp decline in state bear- ing acreage since 1946 can be traced directly to southern California, where many orchards have been pulled because of residential and industrial expansion. With higher-profit alternatives available for land, replantings of Valencias in southern California have not kept pace with removals. Trends in yields and production Although the yield of Valencia oranges has been highly variable, the general trend was upward until about World War II. Postwar yields have averaged near the World War II level. The in- creased yields mainly reflect improve- ments in pest and disease control, soil management, and other cultural prac- tices, as well as the greater yielding capacity of maturing trees. Postwar yields have not increased, partly because of unfavorable weather conditions and partly because many of the orchard re- movals in southern California have been in the highest-yielding areas. The upward production trend until World War II re- flects increases in both bearing acreage and yields. Relatively constant yields since World War II, along with reduced bearing acreage, have resulted in a down- ward production trend. Year-to-year fluc- tuations in production are caused mainly by yield fluctuations; however, the long- time production trend closely follows the trend in total bearing acreage. Changes in bearing and nonbearing acreage Navel oranges are a winter orange shipped mainly during the months of November through April and used pri- marily for fresh consumption. Hence, competition from frozen concentrates has had less impact on California navel oranges than on California Valencias. Relative returns have now shifted in favor of navels. A recent increase in non- bearing acreage of navel oranges and only a very few new Valencia plantings [31 IUU.UUU 1 I 1 I i l r 90,000 ~^->_ ^ _ < p.State 80,000 ^^^s. 70,000 Southern California >^ ^ v) 60,000 """* ■ • * rv ^ v^^ ^ 0) V """" ^""^^ JJ, 50,000 - ^«n^^^ c § 40,000 OQ - ^^^ 30,000 - m SanJoaquin Valley-^, 20,000 NAVEL (AND MISCELLANEOUS) ORANGES: 10,000 1 1 1 1 1 I Bearing acreage by districts, California 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1920 1935 1940 Year 1950 1955 10,000 2,000 1,000 NAVEL(AND MISCELLANEOUS) ORANGES: Nonbearing acreage by districts, California an Joaquin Valley-2-*' •' % .... "'Sacramento Valley*" i i i I i 'r-1-n..i.j..i..L 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 Year 1945 1955 [32] (saxoq) 3JDD BuiJDaq Jad p\Q\\ o 00 o o OOO OOOOO CNOCO O "V CN O CO o o OOO -«T CN (N CN > - JO *• u 7 * s / o / / u o C <^ - en ]^> ^> _ c - — ^ — v^'if o 0) -o C i _ _ « Q. ID > — 0) \ 2 >- ""^**^ *^* °- -a ^^^^ ^ c ^^^^^^ ^^ m o _ — .2 v \ u 3 X \ -o / • o CL to LU ^> > - O I i z ^^ .' < a: > - ID ( ( O LU Z / / " < !^ LU U «* — uo ^^»^^. 2 7 ; M Q z < 1 1 -J J ) - LU > < < - < Z > : 1 1 1 1 1 1 i o >■ o o o o o o (saxoq 000l) uoipnpojj reflect in part the changed outlook and earning positions of the two varieties. However, the season for California navels coincides with that for Florida fresh oranges. Recent increases in acreage and production of fresh winter oranges in Florida and elsewhere have depressed prices and returns to California navel producers. As a result, total bearing acre- age has declined gradually, though some- what more rapidly in recent years. Shifts in location of production As with Valencias, most of the decline in bearing acreage of California navel or- anges has taken place in southern Cali- fornia, while bearing acreage in the San Joaquin Valley has remained fairly con- stant. Once again the acreage declines in southern California are in areas of sub- division and industrial expansion, prin- cipally in Los Angeles, Orange, and western San Bernardino counties. Or- chard pullings in these areas have not been offset by new plantings. The chart indicates a recent increase in new plant- ings, particularly in 1956. Increased in- terest in plantings in the San Joaquin Valley (mainly in the favorable thermal belt in Tulare County) probably stems from two phenomena: 1) relocation by southern California producers forced out of the Los Angeles area by urbanization, and 2) a search for high-income crops to pay increasing water costs in this region of the San Joaquin Valley. In the Sacra- mento Valley, damaging freezes followed heavy plantings in the early thirties, pre- venting this area from becoming a major producing area, though isolated plant- ings remain. Foothill plantings in Butte and Sacramento counties are generally in thermal belts. The major acreages in Glenn County, however, receive supple- mentary heating. Trends in yields and production Yields of navel oranges have followed the same general trend as yields of Valen- cia oranges. Similarly, the uptrend from 1920 to World War II was largely caused by improved cultural practices and the maturing of orchards. A leveling-off of yields since World War II reflects in- creased age of orchards (many past peak production) and, possibly, less-favorable growing conditions. Invigoration treat- ments involving pruning and topping are often used to increase yields in older orchards. Before World War II, increases in yields more than offset the gradual acreage decline, resulting in a net in- crease in production. Since World War II, the interaction of a declining acreage with a relatively constant level of yields has caused a production downturn. LEMONS Changes in bearing and nonbearing acreage Practically all of the United States lemon crop was produced in California until recent years. The crop was marketed primarily in fresh form. Since about 1950, the volume of processed lemon products has increased sharply, prima- ril\ because of the development of frozen lemonade and its rapid acceptance by consumers. Consequently, certain domes- tic areas (mainly Florida and Arizona) and foreign areas (mainly Italy) that formerly were unable to compete with California's high-quality lemons in the fresh market are now able to compete in the expanded processed market. [34] 70,000 60,000 50,000 (0 V 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 — — — i 1 1 1 LEMONS: Bearing acreage by districts, California State- t: Southern California (excluding Santa Barbara and Ventura counties) -****"^ 1920 I I I ■ 1 I I I I I I I I "*^— Santa Barbara and Ventura I I I I I I I I l I 1 I l counties I I I I Mil Year 1950 1955 17,000 16,000 1— -i 1 1 r Nonbearing acreage by districts, California State 1920 I I I I /A /y Southern California\ S (excluding Santa N I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1925 1930 1935 1940 Year 1955 Past trends in bearing acreage are closely associated with nonbearing acre- ages, with proper allowance for plantings to reach bearing age. Bearing acreage re- mained constant in 1920-34. However, increased plantings following the rela- tively high-income years of the twenties led to greater bearing acreage in the mid- thirties, reaching a peak at the close of World War II. During World War II, the availability of many profitable alterna- tive crops reduced new lemon plantings so that the postwar bearing acreage has fallen off slightly. A sharp drop in re- ported bearing acreage in 1949 arose from a change in reporting methods rather than an actual acreage change; thus, while the data after 1948 are con- sistent, they are not entirely comparable with earlier data. Better returns in recent years for fresh lemons, and particularly for processed lemons, have encouraged new plantings. Thus, it seems reasonable to assume that the bearing acreage of California lemons will stabilize or rise slightly in the next few years. [35] (saxoq) ajDD 6uuDaq jad pp|^ o o o c CN C o o o oo «o -n o o o o o o o CN O 00 >0 "^ CN O o o oo "v - ^' ** o aliforni ^ tJfiS - U *"^^ of — k_ u D C7> ^s. <= - *iZ \S .2 o f • T". 0) — a. *^^-* Q- -T3 ^Vt "~* >. S * -o / / c / * _ D c Cs — o >> - Ti "TO <£. - o fa- ^> > - a. XV* - — Co •z. <^s — o LU -J 2> / - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 D >- o o o o o o (saxoq OOO'I) uojpnpwj Shifts in location of production The location of lemon acreage within California has shifted. Only certain localized areas, all in southern California, are well suited to commercial lemon growing. The coastal plains of Ventura and Santa Barbara counties have become relatively more important producers, while aggregate acreage elsewhere in southern California has declined. Main reasons for the shift apparently are: 1) relocation forced by urbanization, and 2) relatively higher yields in Ventura and Santa Barbara counties. Recent plantings in the Coachella and other desert valley districts also have added to nonbearing acreage. Trends in yields and production Lemon yields demonstrated a strong upward trend in 1920-40. The peak yields in 1940 resulted from an acreage shift to higher-yielding Santa Barbara and Ventura counties, improved care of trees, and, possibly, very favorable weather conditions. Increasing yields during the prewar period were due in part to improved orchard management and production practices, particularly pest and disease control, better protec- tion against adverse climate, and im- proved soil management and fruit handling methods. Yields in 1940-50 were somewhat lower because of less- favorable weather. Damaging freezes in 1948 and 1949 depressed yields in those years. Since 1950, yields have again re- sumed an upswing. In postwar years the number of trees per acre has been in- creased and an improved strain of dis- ease-free lemon has been adopted. Both of these factors will probably contribute to further increases in yield per acre. Production trends are a direct result of the bearing acreage and yield trends discussed above. Production rose during 1920-40, primarily from increasing yields but also from some increase in acreage. Declining yields during the forties were nearly offset by the rise in bearing acreage. Since 1950, yield in- creases have more than offset acreage declines, thereby increasing production. Year-to-year production changes are highly and positively correlated with yield changes. [37] N U ALMONDS Changes in bearing and nonbearing acreage Almond production in the United States is concentrated in California, which has about 98 per cent of the total acreage. U. S. imports of almonds (mainly from Spain and Italy) have de- creased in relative and absolute tonnage as the domestic industry has expanded. Changes in the nonbearing and bear- ing acreages of almonds are not easily ex- plained by past general economic condi- tions. In fact, trends in nonbearing acreage run counter to conditions in the national economy. Nonbearing acreage declined in the twenties, though prices in general were favorable. Plantings and nonbearing acreage increased substanti- ally during the depression. Nonbearing acreage declined again during World War II, despite generally high prices. This unusual relationship may be partly explained by observing that almond prices relative to prices of other agricul- tural commodities are probably more sig- nificant than the absolute level of almond prices in determining new plantings. An- other explanation may be in the nature of the crop, which is relatively easy to grow and prospers under somewhat adverse soil and other conditions. Thus, during periods of falling prices, growers appar- ently shifted from higher-risk crops to almonds. During periods of higher prices, growers apparently shifted away from almonds toward walnuts and other crops. Changes in bearing acreage logi- cally follow changes in nonbearing acre- age, allowing nearly ten years for a newly planted crop to come into significant bearing. Shifts in location of production The bearing acreage of almonds in the Central Coast (mainly the Brentwood district of Contra Costa County and the Paso Robles district of San Luis Obispo County) has declined in recent years. At the same time, bearing acreages have steadily increased in the Sacramento Valley (largely in Butte, Yolo, Colusa, and Sutter counties) and in the northern San Joaquin Valley (mainly in Stanis- laus, Merced, and San Joaquin counties) . The shift, which can be explained by higher yields in the interior, is far from complete, as clearly shown by a steady decline in nonbearing acreage in the Central Coast area. Favorable grower prices in 1955-56 have encouraged new plantings in the Central Valley. Much of the new acreage is being planted on rela- tively less-productive soils near the peach-growing areas. Trends in yields and production Yields of almonds in California have increased since the late thirties, reaching a record peak in 1956. The increase re- sulted from a combination of several factors: 1) better cultural practices, in- cluding more and better fertilizers and pesticides, better pruning, increased pro- tection against frost, better spacing of trees and other practices; 2) favorable climate in almond-growing areas; and 3) a shift of acreage to the interior Sacra- mento and San Joaquin valleys, where [38] better soils and irrigation and improved varieties provide opportunities for higher yields. The outlook is for further yield increases as older, low-producing coastal orchards are replaced by higher-yielding orchards in the Central Valley. As a result of yield and acreage in- creases, total almond production in Cali- fornia has increased fivefold since the twenties. With bearing acreage likely to remain near the current level and with yields increasing, prospects are for a con- tinuation of the uptrend in total produc- tion. 100,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 - 1^ I I ALMONDS: Bearing acreage by districts, California State T* " >v5 "^-San Joaquin Valley t l l i I I i l l I i I i l 1 i i l » I i i i i I I i J_L I I 1 I 1920 1930 1935 1940 Year 1945 1950 1955 40,000 30,000 £ 25,000 «= 20,000 10,000 - 5,000 1 1 ALMONDS: i i i i Nonbearing acreage by districts, California 1 - >^ State Central - / Coast MM \ \ / ^ Sacramento Valley X^ Cr-.y ""•.. \ ** /^^s—San Joaquin Valley >!*,; i i 7>h^f r *i s =rM-rT-rT" i i i i \ \ i i"i iT'iTi 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 Year 1945 1950 1955 [39] (SUO|) 8J0D 6UUD3CJ jad p\Q\\ (such QOO'l) uojpnpojj WALNUTS Changes in bearing and nonbearing acreage In terms of tonnage, walnuts are the main tree-nut crop grown in the United States, followed closely by pecans and more distantly by almonds and filberts (hazelnuts). Commercial walnut produc- tion in this country is confined to the Pacific Coast (California, Oregon, and Washington), with California dominat- ing — about 80 per cent of U. S. acreage and 90 per cent of U. S. production. Con- centration of production allows the in- dustry to be highly organized; about 85 per cent of California's production is processed and marketed by the Diamond Walnut Growers, Inc., a grower-owned cooperative marketing association. As with most tree crops, the annual supply of walnuts is little affected by current economic forces, though they in- fluence new plantings, affecting supplies later. Thus, a steady expansion in bear- ing acreage through the thirties reflects a high rate of new plantings in the twenties, when prices were favorable. Depression prices during the thirties dis- couraged new plantings. The resulting decrease in nonbearing acreage was halted only after another high price period, during World War II. Total bear- ing acreage has declined somewhat since 1940, mainly because of a rapid rate of removals in southern California. Shifts in location of production The decline of bearing acreage in southern California has been striking. This acreage is in three principal dis- tricts: Pomona, Ventura-Santa Paula- Moorpark, and Santa Barbara-Goleta. Acreages have increased substantially in the Central Coast (Santa Clara Valley, central Contra Costa County, and Lake County), the San Joaquin Valley (Linden, Modesto, and Visalia), and the Sacramento Valley (Yuba City-Marys- ville, Colusa, Chico, and Corning areas) . The rapid rate of tree removals in south- ern California has resulted from subur- ban development, high production costs, competition from more-profitable alter- native crops, and pest infestations. The shift to northern areas, also encouraged by potential yield differentials, is ex- pected to continue. Increased new plant- ings in northern California indicate that bearing acreage in these areas will con- tinue to rise in the next few years, prob- ably offsetting the decline in southern California. Trends in yields and production Yields of walnuts have been quite ir- regular from year to year, but follow a general upward trend since the late thir- ties. Age of walnut groves is an im- portant factor in yields, since the pro- ductive capacity of walnut trees increases greatly with size. Therefore, yields per acre will probably increase at a faster rate in the near future as recent plantings in northern California mature. Total production of walnuts in Cali- fornia increased sharply until World War II, with both acreage and yield in- creasing. Since then, increased yields have about offset acreage declines. Sub- stantial annual fluctuations reflect yield variations. Production in the future is ex- pected to rise as yields continue upward and bearing acreage stabilizes. [41 130.000 120,000 110,000 100,000 90,000 o 80,000 g 70,000 i* 60,000 o 50,000 Q) CQ 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 -San Joaquin Valley WALNUTS: Bearing acreage by districts, California ^^Southern California Central Coast xoan joaquin yauey ^^-r*"*— ~ i i i I Sacramento Val I ,1 I I 1 I ! e y. i i i i 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 Year 1945 1950 1955 WALNUTS: Nonbearing acreage by districts, California 'State 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 Year 1955 [42] (suoj ijoljs) ojdo 6uuDaq jad ppi^ (suoi ijo^s oi) uojpnpoij VEGETABLE CROPS Changes in acreage duction has been relatively stable since California is by far the largest single before World War II, excepting annual asparagus-producing state, with about fluctuations. However, an increasing por- half of U. S. harvested acreage. In both tion of U. S. production has gone to California and the nation, asparagus pro- processing, largely because of increased 90,000 70,000 60,000 -o 50,000 0) V> > 40,000 0) 30,000 u 20,000 10,000 i ^^x. ^ ^ State 1 i - ASPARAGUS: Acreage by distr cts, California ,'^-^ ^■*^ - "•. ^Sacramento Valley / / - / / **" / / <** __ _• -*-^ '^^^3^~'San Joaquin Valley ^Central Coast .-*• ~ i i 1 i i i i 1 i 1 1 I 1 I ..- 1940 1955 Year 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 1U,000 - i ^ns i i ; 3,500 N \ / *N^ < Acreage ^—^__X ^^ - ^ 3,000 - 10 y^ _Q A X^^y - o 2,500 /\ Yield— z*/ \ v*\ y%^ - O / \ w _^^™^^ \ ^^ \ X o y*""^ \ ^r\ ^^*"^ \/ \ ^i* o - o 2,000 ^/^ c - ° 1,500 . — Xz — ~ v v — J Production-^ u 3 -a - S 1,000 _ - a. 500 _ ASPARAGUS: Acreage, production and yield per acre, California _ i i 1 l I 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L - 30 1945 Year 1955 [44] output of frozen asparagus. California, as a major producer of relatively high- priced, high-quality asparagus, has ex- perienced a lesser shift from fresh to processing uses. Harvested acreage in California since 1933 has fluctuated within a rather narrow range (63,000 to 30,000 acres). Shifts in location of production A shift from the Sacramento to the San Joaquin Valley since 1933 has been striking. The major reason has been Fusarium wilt in asparagus-producing areas of the Sacramento Valley. Aspara- gus cannot be profitably replanted on afflicted lands even after many years. Hence, asparagus acreage has moved south to "clean" soils in the Delta area. Acreage in the Central Coast area has increased slightly over the years. Recent greater plantings in the Salinas Valley may continue this uptrend. Recent plant- ings in Coachella and Imperial valleys have not yet come into production. When they do, a long-time downtrend in south- ern California may be reversed. Produc- tion costs are extremely high in southern California, yet premium prices on the early fresh market may encourage future production. Asparagus acreage may well shift considerably in the future as the search continues for new disease-free soils well suited to asparagus production. Trends in yields and production In contrast to most California crops, asparagus shows no general upward trend in yields since 1933. The geo- graphic shifts are responsible. The move to lower-producing soils in the Delta has been roughly offset by improved cultural practices. The peat soils of the Delta area provide lower yields than were obtained on the peat sediment soils of former asparagus-producing centers; asparagus beds were also longer-lived on the sedi- ment soils. High water tables and slow subsidence in the Delta area are addi- tional problems hampering production. Relatively stable acreage and yields have resulted in remarkably stable asparagus production over the years. CANTALOUPS Harvest of cantaloups in California starts about mid-May in the Imperial Valley, gradually moves north into the San Joaquin Valley, and ends in October in the Sacramento Valley. For reporting purposes, cantaloup production in Cali- fornia is divided into two classes: 1) spring, harvested from about May 1 to July 10; and 2) midsummer, harvested from about July 1 to October 10. In the thirties the desert valleys of Imperial and Riverside counties accounted for practi- cally the entire spring production in the United States. Since the thirties Cali- fornia has lost part of the spring market, first to the Yuma ( Arizona) district and later to Texas. In the last 3 or 4 years the combined acreages of Arizona and Texas have equaled or exceeded Cali- fornia acreage. However, the acreage of midsummer cantaloups in California ( primarily from the San Joaquin Valley) has increased — from about one fifth of the U. S. total acreage in 1939-40 to about one half in recent years. [45] 40,000 " I i | 1 r— SPRING CANTALOUPES: Acreage, production and yield per acre, California \ Acreage :res harvested P P o o o o — _o o o O o o ~ c 3,000 2,500 2,000 V A» /\Yield y~ /\ < 10,000 ti 3 -o O CL 1,500 1,000 Production V V 500 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 i 1 1 I l l 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 19 30 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 Year 120 w o Spring cantaloups A combination of factors has ac- counted for the decline of spring canta- loup acreage in California. Diseases, pri- marily cantaloup mosaic and crown blight, have harmed the yields and qual- ity of cantaloups in the Imperial Valley. The result has been a shift to areas both within and outside California. Until 1940, almost the entire California spring cantaloup crop was produced in Imperial Valley. By 1956, Riverside County (mainly the Blythe area) grew almost as many acres of spring cantaloups as did Imperial County. In addition, produc- tion has shifted out of the state to the Yuma district and to Texas and Mexico. Buyers prefer the Arizona cantaloups, and producers there have averaged slightly better yields than producers in California. Texas and Mexico provide in- creased competition in the "early" mar- ket — Mexico in April and Texas in May. Lower transport costs to midwestern and eastern markets have proved advanta- geous to Texas, even though yields have averaged considerably lower than in the California-Arizona area. Spring cantaloup yields in California have been highly variable. In addition, the level of yields has not increased since the thirties. As mentioned above, disease is the major reason. Because the general level of yields has not changed, total pro- duction closely follows trends in acreage. Midsummer cantaloups The midsummer cantaloup shipping season in the Central Valley begins about mid-June, in the Delano-Bakersfield dis- trict of Kern County, followed by the "Westside" section of the Huron, Coa- linga, Lemoore, San Joaquin, Firebaugh, Mendota, Dos Palos, and Los Banos dis- tricts. The Tracy- Vernalis-Patterson- Newman-Crows Landing and Turlock- Modesto areas follow a peak in August and September. Late-season harvest in selected areas of the Sacramento Valley is completed by mid-October. Growth in acreage and production of midsummer cantaloups in the San Joa- quin Valley followed the decline of spring cantaloups in southern California. Many growers moved north from the Imperial Valley into various areas of the Central Valley. Thus, most of the World War II and postwar expansion in acreage was in the San Joaquin Valley. Southern California, which markets slightly earlier than the Central Valley, has maintained a relatively constant midsummer acre- [46] age. Fluctuations in acreage since about 1948 partly reflect grower response to prices of the preceding year. Yields in re- cent years have fluctuated less widely than in the late thirties and early forties. This stabilization can be partially at- tributed to the relative shift in acreage to the San Joaquin Valley from southern California, where early yields are highly variable. The development of mildew- resistant varieties has also served to stabilize yields. Total production of mid- summer cantaloups closely follows gen- eral acreage trends. 30,000 -D 20,000 0) 10,000 - MIDSUMMER CANTALOUPES: State Acreage by districts, California 1935 1940 1950 1955 Year £ 30,000 0) t o v 20,000 - 10,000 1 1 1 1 1 A /Yield MIDSUMMER CANTALOUPES: 4,000 \l\ '^~ .—3,500 A/ V V jhtf^^ - §3,000 o o ^2,500 c Production —, / 1 \ , /s *S ^ - -52,000 O ai 1,500 _ / /^Acreage 1 V / 1,000 -w> y 500 Acreage, production and yield per acre, California 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 200 1935 1945 Year 140 120 o o 0) 100 - o 60 >^ [47] California is a major shipper of car- rots, in recent years producing about 40 per cent of the total U. S. crop. Carrots in California are grown in three seasons : 1) winter, harvested from about Decem- ber 1 to June 10; 2) early summer, har- vested from about May 20 to August 31 ; and 3) late fall, harvested from about September 1 to February 28. Shipments from California during the winter orig- inate from the desert valleys (Imperial. Coachella, and Palo Verde) in Imperial and Riverside counties. The chief com- petitor with southern California in the winter season is Texas. While Texas has roughly double the carrot acreage of California, production from the two states has been nearly equal until recent years. California early summer carrots are produced primarily in the Central Coast area, particularly the Salinas- Watsonville and Santa Maria areas. Late fall carrots are produced in those two dis- tricts plus the San Joaquin Valley and southern California. Early summer and late fall carrots from California have relatively little direct competition in their main shipping months. However, shipments of spring carrots from Ari- zona, late summer carrots from eastern states, and early fall carrots from west- ern and midwestern states overlap with California carrots to some extent. Winter carrots Acreage and production of winter car- rots in southern California increased rapidly to World War II, leveled off, and since 1950 have declined. Chief reason for the decline has been increasing com- petition from Texas, especially in eastern and midwestern markets. The almost complete changeover from bunched to topped carrots has allowed carrots from the lower Rio Grande Valley in southern Texas to compete strongly with carrots from southern California with attractive tops. Of course, lower transport costs to eastern, southern, and midwestern mar- kets have also been an advantage to Texas. Most of the sales of carrots from southern California are now restricted 12,000 > 8,000 O 6,000 u < 2.000 1 1 1 1 1 r WINTER CARROTS: Acreage, production and yield per acre, California Yield § 2,500 f- o o" 2 2,000 [48] 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 0) > o 5,000 u 4,000 < 3,000 2,000 1,000 8,000 O 1.800 o V 1,200 3 o ol 900 600 300 'MA If \ v„ \y \ \J v \/v? Production EARLY SUMMER CARROTS: Acreage, production and yield per acre, California I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l t I I I l 300 210 ^ 0) 150 fc o 120 a. a> 90 >• 1945 Year - 3,600 1 1 Acreoge-^l \ 1 1 1 3,300 ' h I A a/v^ 'k /' 3,000 2,700 il V i/5 o o o o" o 2,400 2,100 —J Yield^ | wV - \ r~ 1 — • 1 1 Production 1,800 1,500 1,200 : ^ \ /Production 900 - - 600 LATE FALL CARROTS: - Acreage, production and yield per acre, California 300 l 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 l 1 i l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 200 — 4 - 100 1955 Year [.49) to Pacific Coast, northwestern, and Canadian markets. Annual yields of Cali- fornia winter carrots have been quite variable, partly because of cold-weather damage (in 1949 and 1950, for ex- ample) . The general level of yields, how- ever, has risen as producers have im- proved cultural practices and manage- ment. Early summer carrots The acreage of early summer carrots increased sharply in 1943, in response to high grower prices in 1942 and a strong demand during World War II. Since then, however, acreage declined to pre- war levels. Year-to-year acreage changes appear closely associated with prices of the previous year. Acreage has shifted from southern California (mainly Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, and Ventura counties) to the Central Coast area (pri- marily Salinas Valley). Accompanying these acreage shifts has been a gradual, and irregular, increase in average yields. Production has been quite erratic, fol- lowing general changes in acreage. Late fall carrots Acreage changes in late fall carrots are similar to the changes in early summer carrots: acreage shot up in 1943, stimu- lated by high prices. Since the war, acre- age has dropped off, with annual fluctua- tions primarily reflecting previous prices. Shifts in the location of late fall acreage also parallel the shifts in location of early summer acreage. The Central Coast area (primarily Salinas Valley) has increased relative to southern California (Los An- geles, Santa Barbara, and Ventura coun- ties) and the San Joaquin Valley. The general trend in yields has been up, be- cause of improved cultural practices and the shift to the higher-yielding coastal valleys. Exceptionally high yields in 1943-45 resulted from a combination of 1) exceptionally favorable weather, and 2) a lower culling rate to increase ton- nage at the prevailing high prices. Total production reflects wide swings in acre- age and yield during and after the war. Aside from 1943-45, late fall carrot pro- duction has generally increased since 1934. Celery production in California is localized according to shipping season. Annual production is divided into the following seasons and approximate har- vesting dates: 1) winter, harvested No- vember 20 to March 31; 2) spring, harvested April 1 to August 31; 3) early summer, harvested June 20 to August 31 ; and 4) late fall, harvested September 1 to January 15. For our analysis, the spring and early summer seasons are combined in a spring and early summer season. Celery harvest begins with the winter season in the south coast area of southern California and moves generally north along the coast through the spring, early summer, and late fall seasons. Roughly one fourth of the total Califor- nia acreage is planted to winter celery, one fourth to spring and early summer celery, and about one half to late fall celery. However, the relative acreage during the first two seasons has been in- [50] 5,000 1 1 1 1 WINTER CELERY: Acreage by districts, California 4,000 y^^/ State -^T \/y^^ ~0 3,000 J / VI 1 f~ > o 1* -J /s" Southern California a Jj 2,000 < -^ /V^/~^ 1,000 * \^San Joaquin Valley i i — 1 — — i^ — • — i ii ii i I i i i i *>!,.„ i 1940 1945 Year 1950 1955 4,000 | 1 1 ' 1 WINTER CELERY: Acreage, production and yield per acre, California Acreage -> * *\ / / ^\ / (/) / V 3,000 _ -£ / o o o M \ 1 J^. ™^^^ ^^ 0^2,500 o Yield-^-' \ T / 2,000 - § 2,000 ' >wW \. / h/^-V y — ' ' 1,000 -o 1,500 o a. - 1,000 500 ^*»»% .•^-—Production 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 600 vi 500 o o 400 0) u o CL 300 200 100 1935 1940 1945 Year 1950 1955 A sizable proportion of the California celery crop is shipped directly to west coast urban centers. Much of midwestern and eastern demand is met by Florida, Michigan, and several eastern states. Harvested acreage of both winter and spring celery in the United States is divided about one third to California and two thirds to Florida. However, Cali- fornia has a higher proportion of total production because of substantially higher yields, particularly in the spring. Michigan is the chief competitor with California in the early summer market; [51] 6,000 5,500 4,500 - 4,000 Q) 3,500 V) 0) > 3,000 V) 0> u 2,500 < 1,500 1,000 500 SPRING AND EARLY SUMMER CELERY: Acreage by districts, - California / - State >/^""*^ - / Southern California>"^ / ^"^ — ^ JY ' - 1 V^^ l * Central Coast / T f " r — T r — f"7"l I I I 1 I 1 I I 1 I Year 7,000 - 3,500 - 6,000 - —3,000 «> 5,000 o 4,000 a> u 3,000 < 2,000 1,000 _Q § 2,500 o o 2 2,000 c o •r 1,500 u 500 SPRING AND EARLY SUMMER CELERY: Acreage, production and yield per acre, California _ 600 — / / Production / / — / Acreage / S — * / v J LJ L-l L_L 1935 1945 Year i i i I i 1950 400 100 1955 rs2i 12,000 11,000 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 10 g 5,000 < 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 - LATE FALL CELERY: Acreage by districts, California ^•n*,^' \y \^~San Joaquin Valley Central Coast — *7 »• .J V "' x 1940 1945 1955 Year 12,000 10,000 - 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 LATE FALL CELERY: Yield ^/ 3,500 rS / - £ 3,000 O - g 2,500 o - c 2,000 O 't3 Acreage-^. A *>y / - -£ 1.SO0 o 1,000 /^-Production ; 500 Acreage, production and yi 1 l 1 1 I 1 1 1 I l I 1 1 1 eld per acre, California _ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 250 £ u 200 - a 150 a> 1945 Year 1950 [53] each state has about one third of the total acreage, with the remaining third divided among New Jersey, Ohio, and Massachu- setts. California is the only important supplier of late fall celery. Winter celery Southern California (mainly the Chula Vista-Oceanside district, in San Diego County, and the Venice-Oxnard and Orange County districts) provides the major shipments of winter celery in the state. Harvested acreage in these areas is more than double prewar levels. High wartime demand encouraged plantings in Tulare County, in the San Joaquin Val- ley. This area, however, has since gone out of production, because of damaging frosts and cold weather. Average yields of winter celery have not increased ap- preciably since the 1940-41 level. In fact, average yields were depressed during the late forties as low-yielding Tulare County briefly entered the picture. Total produc- tion, however, has steadily increased since 1940 as acreage increased. Spring and early summer celery The Venice-Oxnard and Orange County districts produce most of the California spring celery crop. The early summer crop comes from several areas including the Oceano area, of San Luis Obispo County, the Santa Clara Valley, and the Salinas-Watsonville district. Since World War II, acreage and produc- tion of spring and early summer celery from California has increased both ab- solutely and relative to Florida, Michi- gan, and other areas. Reasons for the relative increase in California appear to be higher yields, more attractive packag- ing, and a steadier source of supply. Acreage growth has been faster in the Central Coast than in southern California because of new slow-bolting varieties that can be set out early in cold climates. Celery yields for the spring and early summer season have increased as pro- ducers have improved cultural practices, including fertilization and pest and dis- ease control. Total production has in- creased sharply as both acreage and yields have increased. Late fall celery Late fall celery is produced in several areas of California. There is a shift, how- ever, from the San Joaquin Valley (the Delta area) and southern California (mainly Los Angeles County), with further concentration in the Central Coast area (Santa Maria, Salinas-Wat- sonville, and Santa Clara Valley dis- tricts). Important factors in the shift have been higher yields in the Central Coast area and the development of direct seeding. Late fall celery yields have in- creased sharply because of improved cul- tural practices and the shift of produc- tion to the higher-yielding coastal val- leys. The uptrend in yield has more than offset the drop in acreage. California is by far the most important single commercial lettuce-growing area in the United States, averaging slightly over 60 per cent of the national total. Another 15 to 20 per cent is produced in Arizona. Sharp increases in lettuce pro- duction in these two states since the early thirties have been matched by increases in other areas, leaving the California- Arizona share of the market about con- stant. However, there have been signifi- cant shifts in the location of production [54] (' sc ll 00l) aJDD J9d PP'.A o o o oo — 1 LXn 'J K 1 1 1 1 1 } \ - S ' v.. — \^ > - s. / ( , - D E > >> _ Jj> _ _ ~o *--^>h £ 1 ield per acre, C >- u < i \ > - ^ < * — C o > - roductioi < > 1 - Q. t — •*■ r — u < 1 1 1 1 1 1 — LLt U o o o o o o o Z> CS i— (- H 111 -J C S SI OOO'OOl) uoipnpaij Ctl LU • H Z ^ 1 I 1 1 o a> >- pd4S9AJDij sajoy 50,000 40,000 30,000 o 20,000 < 10,000 1 1 1 r EARLY SPRING LETTUCE: Acreage by districts, California ^Stat \V / ^Central Coast V Southern California I I I L 1935 1945 1950 Year > o 40,000 !•-. 30,000 20,000 Production EARLY SPRING LETTUCE: ° 2,000 o «° 1,000 - 140 Acreage, production and yield per acre, California I I I I I l 1 ■ I l I I I I I l_l l l I I I 1935 1945 Year 1950 170 s-~. \A -O 100 o o 4) 80 u o a> 60 a. -o 01 40 >- and the season of marketings in the west- ern lettuce industry. Since lettuce is consumed fresh, the industry has developed so as to provide fresh supplies every month of the year. Because it is perishable, market timing is vital in determining prices and returns. Excellent crops are sometimes left un- harvested if prices are low. California lettuce data are reported by the follow- ing seasonal groups: 1) winter lettuce, harvested November 20 to April 15; 2) early spring lettuce, harvested March 25 to May 31; 3) summer lettuce, harvested June 1 to August 31; and 4) early fall lettuce, harvested September 1 to Decem- ber 15. In all four seasons, California is the most important lettuce-producing state. California's two major lettuce areas are the Salinas-Watsonville-Hollister [56] 0> > o 20,000 10,000 - 20,000 1 1 1 1 r SUMMER LETTUCE: Acreage by districts, California 1940 1950 1955 Year -7,000. 6,000 .£) 5,000 o O O 4,000 o o c 3,000 o I) z> 2,000 o Q_ 1,000 SUMMER LETTUCE /\ /-Acreage Acreage, production and yield per acre, California J_J LJ L J I I L J I I I I I I I l_l L H 60 40 20 1945 Year district (mainly in Monterey, San Benito, and Santa, Cruz counties) and the Im- perial Valley. The former district ships lettuce during spring, summer, and fall ; Imperial Valley ships a winter crop. Before World War II, the various lettuce- producing areas of California and Ari- zona had well-defined marketing periods. In recent years, however, lettuce ship- ments from the major districts have over- lapped increasingly as producers have at- tempted to extend their shipping seasons. Production in new districts has also im- pinged on the markets of established dis- tricts. Winter lettuce Imperial Valley supplies about 70 per cent of all U. S. commercial lettuce ship- ments in January and February. The Yuma (Arizona) district, along with Texas, supplies most of the remaining shipments during these months. In recent years, shipments from Imperial have pushed more heavily into the mid- December period, formerly dominated by Arizona's Salt River Valley district. Imperial Valley has also increased ship- ments in March, again at the expense of the Salt River Valley. However, all dis- [57] 40,000 30,000 20,000 - 10,000 Central Coast EARLY FALL LETTUCE: Acreage by districts, California San Joaquin Southern California Sacramento Valley ^ ^.Valley f i"f^?r.K: ;T.7"rtr:.Lrr.Tf:"L..j...i...r..i...T:..r:; rrtn/TlTm 1935 Year 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 6,000 1 1 1 I 1 5,500 - EARLY FALL LETTUCE: A 5,000 Acreage, production and yields per acre, California »\ / \ / * X _ 4,500 Production f \ , - _ 4,000 - ^ion (100,000 K> CO CO o o o o o o /"^yzf v s/ ~\/ Yeld - 3 -o "***\/ - £ 2,000 1,500 - • — ~x - A> ^ V-*-' Acreage - 1,000 - 500 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I l I 1 1 I i 1 I 1 i I I 1 1 1 1935 1940 1945 Year 1950 1955 160 -? -a 120 o o 100 tricts have lost ground relative to Texas favored by lower production costs and during the winter. About three fourths shorter distances to local and eastern of Texas' total shipments move to market markets. However, uncertainty of weath- during October, December, and January. er is a limiting factor. Rapid expansion in Texas has been Acreage of winter lettuce in California [58] (Imperial Valley) has expanded rapidly since the thirties. This over-all growth has been made possible by an increased demand for winter lettuce. Yields per acre, though highly variable from year to year, have trended strongly upward. Factors contributing to the yield increase have been more intensive cultivation and improvement in production practices such as disease control and fertilization. In consequence of increases in both acre- age and yields, production has increased since about 1940. Early spring lettuce Most of the early spring lettuce crop is produced in the Salinas- Watsonville- Hollister area, of the Central Coast. The Blythe area in southern California, how- ever, has been producing an increasing proportion of the total. The peak of ship- ments from the Salinas area has shifted from April to May as the Salt River Val- ley area has moved into the earlier part of the period. Also contributing to the shift toward a shorter spring season in Salinas have been 1 ) adverse weather that often delays April harvest, and 2) greater de- mands for lettuce in May because ot higher temperatures. Because of this shift toward later spring marketings (which now extend into the period of "summer" lettuce) the acreage of early spring let- tuce has not increased. Year-to-year fluctuations in acreage appear highly correlated with prices received in the previous year. In general, yields have trended upward. Wide fluctuations be- fore 1950 were partly due to disease, primarily lettuce mosaic and tipburn. The Great Lakes variety, adopted in about 1948, has since provided more consistent yields. With acreage at a rela- tively constant level since 1933, produc- tion changes mainly reflect changes in yields per acre. Summer lettuce The Salinas area is the major commer- cial shipper of lettuce during June, July, and August, though the Santa Maria area is important in supplying California markets. In other parts of the country, however, "home-grown" supplies trucked to local markets increase during the sum- mer. Despite increased competition from areas closer to the major consumption centers, Salinas Valley is likely to remain the dominant producer of high-quality summer lettuce because of its cool sum- mers relative to other areas. Acreage of summer lettuce in California has fluctu- ated about a relatively constant level since the mid-thirties. Yields, however, have risen sharply, because of greater use of fertilizers, insect control, and im- provements in other cultural practices. A shift to the Great Lakes variety, in about 1948, has also influenced yields. Because of yield increases, total production has increased steadily since 1933. Early fall lettuce The Salinas - Watsonville - Hollister area is also the major producer of early fall lettuce. Shipments from this area in November and December, however, have declined as competition from the Salt River Valley and Yuma area has in- creased. Thus, both the early spring and late fall shipping seasons for Salinas let- tuce have been shortened by competition from Arizona. Despite the shorter fall season, the acreage of fall lettuce in the Salinas area has increased slightly. Con- centration of the marketing in September and October has also contributed to in- creased yields, since rain in the coastal area is often unfavorable to November and December marketings. Total produc- tion of early fall lettuce in California has increased sharply as both acreages and yields have increased. [59] Potatoes are grown commercially in all states, but with only 12 states sup- plying about three fourths of total U. S. production. The major producers are five western states (California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Colorado), four central states (Minnesota, North Dakota, Wisconsin, and Michigan), and three eastern states (New York, Pennsylvania, and Maine). Since the mid-thirties U. S. acreage has dropped steadily. However, tremendous increases in potato yields have offset acreage declines so that total production has remained about the same. Reasons for the yield increase are: 1) shifts from low-yielding to high-yielding areas, 2) shifts from small, noncommer- cial growers to large, commercial grow- ers, 3) increased irrigation and fertiliza- tion, new varieties, and more efficient control of insects and disease, and 4) generally favorable growing conditions. U. S. potato consumption has remained high because of population increases while per capita consumption has stead- ily dropped (from 135 pounds in 1930- 35 to 100 pounds in 1956). An increas- ing proportion of the total supply goes to processing, mainly potato chips. Potato production in California is re- ported in two classifications: 1) late spring potatoes, harvested from about April 10 to July 31 (mainly May-June) ; and 2) late potatoes, harvested from about July 20 to March 15 (mainly August-October). California is the main supplier of late spring potatoes (har- vested May 15 to June 30) , in this period producing more than all other states combined. Output of California late spring potatoes exceeds that of late pota- toes, a characteristic not duplicated by other major producing regions. Late spring potatoes The Kern County district (including the southern part of Tulare County as well as central and northern Kern County) is the heart of the California early potato area. The leading variety is the White Rose, marketed under the name "Long White." The White Rose is a long, elliptical potato with a smooth, white skin, grown best in light soil with uniform moisture, usually supplied by irrigation. Soil and climate that favor the White Rose have encouraged produc- tion in this area. However, the particular advantage held by Kern County growers lies in their ability to market new pota- toes ahead of other areas. Rapid expansion of the Kern County potato district in the late thirties and early forties was encouraged by an in- creasing level of prewar and wartime demand. The "sawtooth" pattern of acre- age since the war largely reflects the response of producers to alternately favorable and unfavorable prices in the previous year. Increases in yields since the thirties can be attributed, at least in part, to the relative shift of acreage into higher-yielding Kern County, increased fertilizer use, adoption of improved irri- gation and soil management practices, and better disease and pest control. The general trend and year-to-year changes in total production closely follow those in Late potatoes Marketings of late potatoes from the San Joaquin Delta area and Salinas Val- ley are heavy in August and September. In October, marketings from these two areas are supplemented by production [60] 90,000 80,000 70,000 h 60,000 50,000 f~ 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 LATE SPRING POTATOES: Acreage by districts, California J 1 I t 1 —J _ J — , 80,000 - > o 60,000 |j 50,000 < 40,000 20,000 10,000 330 1 ! 1 | 1 _ LATE SPRING POTATOES: /\ _ A l /\ #^\ 4 / * \ 'V /> V% JT VI / A 300 270 A-' i li'V 17T a> - "5 240 3 _Q - -O 210 o 00 09 000 1 S /^S~ Acreage »' // 1 n(100, in O o - t 120 , /,' 3 o - CL 90 60 y Acreage, production and yield per acre, California .-J * .S ^— Production 30 - **** — » Q i i 1 i i i i 1 i i i i 1 i i i i 1 i i i i 1 i 440 400 360 e , V) 320 0) -te 3 _D 280 -O o 240 >o 0) u o 160 -Z 1935 1945 Year 1950 1955 from Tulelake. A limited winter harvest early thirties and the end of World War (December-March) takes place in the II. Since then, acreage has fluctuated southern San Joaquin Valley and south- widely but without apparent general ern California (mainly Riverside trend or major shift in location of acre- County). Total acreage of "late pota- age within the state. A slight uptrend in toes" increased substantially between the southern California acreage (mainly [61] 50,000 45,000 40,000 35,000 1> 30,000 vi > o 25,000 w 5 20,000 < 15,000 10,000 5,000 50,000 45,000 40,000 35,000 "S 30,000 - 0) O 25,000 JC 10 (3 20,000 < 15,000 10,000 5,000 LATE POTATOES: Acreage by districts, California ^-North Mountain ' • . . • * '•? ^<^<^San Joaauin Vallev •• • ■ \' JK 'San Joaquin Valley J i i i i L 1940 "Southern "■*«%, California ,mmm mmm — Central Coast J 1 I I ii i i I Year 1950 1955 I 1 1 1 1 - 0,000 60 lb. bushels) 180 160 140 120 100 1 1 ' 1 LATE POTATOES: A »*^— Production i o ** y\ /" ^^ c o 8U / — ^ / ^^\y^^\ e \d - 3 60 - -a o _ Q. 40 Acreage, production and yield per acre, California - 20 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 480 44D -O 400 § 360 u D 280 4) a 240 200 -o ID >• 160 120 80 40 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 Year Riverside County) has been stimulated by development of the potato processing industry; the low water content of late potatoes is particularly desirable for chipping. A moderate increase in the Sa- linas Valley might be expected as some growers search for an alternative crop for lettuce. However, soil adapted to po- tatoes is relatively limited in the Salinas Valley. Yields have fluctuated widely since the thirties, but with a moderate up- ward trend from improvements in man- agement and cultural practices similar to those listed for the late spring crop. As a result, total production also shows an up- ward trend. [62] Changes in acreage Before World War II California's strawberry acreage averaged 5,000 to 6,000 acres. During the war, Japanese sharecroppers, who formerly produced most of the strawberry crop, were evacu- ated from the producing areas. The lack of skilled growers accounts for the sharp dip in acreage in the war years. After the war, state acreage expanded sharply un- til acreage in 1956 was nearly four times the prewar level. This phenomenal growth reflects an exceptionally favor- able economic picture for strawberry producers. High yields, the relatively long harvest season, and favorable prices brought high returns and stimulated new acreage. Sharecroppers still produce an important portion of the crop, but many growers have attained ownership and have shifted to a larger and more com- mercial type of operation. Shifts in location of production Before the war, each of the four maj or producing areas of California contained a substantial share of the state's straw- berry acreage. Since the war, expansion of acreage has been large in the Central Coast area and moderate in the San Joa- quin Valley and southern California. The Sacramento Valley is declining to a negligible position. Expansion has been greatest in the Central Coast area, pri- marily because of a particularly favor- able climate that allows substantially higher yields and continuous bearing of fruit throughout the summer. Only the Central Coast area can successfully grow the Shasta variety, which is superior in quality to the Lassen variety, grown in other areas of California. Areas in the San Joaquin Valley (mainly around Mo- desto and Fresno) have increased acre- age slightly because they can produce a strawberry that comes on the market ten days to two weeks ahead of the Central Coast crop. Southern California expan- sion is likewise based on a seasonal mar- keting advantage. Production from this area (mainly in Orange and Los An- geles counties, the Oxnard Plain, and the Fallbrook area in San Diego County) reaches market even earlier than the San Joaquin Valley crop. However, extremely high land and water costs for southern California strawberry production require a premium price for the product. Straw- berry-producing centers near Lodi, in northern San Joaquin County, and Florin, in Sacramento County, have lost importance and are not expected to re- gain it. The seasonal production peak in the Sacramento Valley coincides with that in the Central Coast; thus the Sacra- mento Valley has no price advantage and is at a considerable yield disadvantage. The strawberry nursery business for Cal- ifornia is located in Tehama and Shasta counties. Trends in yields and production California strawberry yields declined in 1933^12, primarily because virus dis- eases increased in incidence and severity. The low point of 1942 also coincides with the removal of skilled Japanese from the strawberry farms. In 1945, new varieties developed by the University were re- leased. They were well adapted to Cali- fornia conditions and tolerant to the then prevalent virus diseases. The sharp in- crease in yields until about 1949 can be largely explained by widespread adop- tion of these improved varieties. Favor- able prices also encouraged intensifica- tion of such cultural practices as fertili- zation and weed control. Yield variabil- ity since 1949 is attributed primarily to [63] 20,000 17,750 15,000 h £ 10,000 - 10 0) < 5,000 - 2,500 - STRAWBERRIES: Acreage by districts, California f.. f .. T . M .. r .f. 1940 1945 1950 Year 20,000 18,000 16,000 0) 14,000 > v) 12,000 a> 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 260,000 1 1 • 1 1 240,000 - f 220,000 STRAWBERRIES: i i Acreage, production and yield per acre, California - 200,000 - /. - 180,000 - /- -"^ 160,000 _ » y* - _D lr ( / O \ / - o 140,000 i— *■ hJ\ V " - o 120,000 Yield ~2>/ V / /V - i 3 13 7 / ' / - o 100,000 a. / / y 80,000 V / /V - 60,000 — —•—.-*«• ^f ^-Acreage / ^' > V ^ Production -^2^ \^ J - 40,000 ~ 20,000 ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i l i 18,000 16,000 ,_ 14,000 0) U D 12,000 a. 10,000 "O >- 8,000 6,000 2,000 1935 1945 Year 1950 weather conditions. For example, the rec- by the following factors: 1) complete ord yield in 1953 resulted from a season adoption of the new varieties by 1949, exceptionally favorable to strawberry 2) increasing virus infestations because production. In other years (1956, for of concentration of acreage, 3) some example), late spring rains reduced shift from sharecroppers to general farm- yields. A tendency for yields to level out ing and the use of day labor, 4) lack of since 1949 may be partially explained new land adapted to strawberry produc- 64 tion, and 5) failure to eliminate old of the fresh strawberries in the United plantings after production has fallen off. The trend in California strawberry production relates directly to the yield and acreage trends discussed above. In 1955, California produced 33 per cent States and 40 per cent of the processed berries. California is expected to main- tain a leading position in the strawberry industry. U. S. consumers enjoy fresh tomatoes every month of the year. Sources of sea- sonal supplies are determined primarily by climate in various parts of the coun- try. During the late fall, winter and spring, Florida is the principal source. In the late fall and early spring, Texas is a major supplier, but reaches its marketing peak in late spring (May and June). Cuba and Mexico supply large quantities during the winter and spring. California is a major producer of fresh tomatoes during three seasons: 1) early spring, harvested from about December 1 to June 30 (mainly May-June) ; 2) early sum- mer, harvested from about June 1 to Au- gust 31 (mainly July-August) ; and 3) early fall, harvested from about August 15 to December 31 (mainly September- October). California produces about 15 per cent of the U. S. early spring crop, one third to nearly one half of the early summer crop, and the entire early fall crop. 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2.000 1,000 700 600 -£) O o o o 500 •° 400 EARLY SPRING TOMATOES; yield m J ^^ Acreage Acreage, production and yield per acre, California I I I I I I I l I I I I i l I I 1 i I I I i 200 180 160 140 120 V) -Q O o 100 CD u - 80 S 60 1935 1940 1945 Year 1950 1955 [65] Early spring tomatoes Early spring tomatoes are grown in the desert valleys of southern California under forced conditions to take advan- tage of the profitable early market. The main production area is Imperial Val- ley, where a mild climate allows early marketing and the possibility of ex- tremely favorable prices. Coachella Val- ley tomatoes are marketed somewhat later, usually in May and early June. The acreage of early spring tomatoes in- creased in the late thirties and early for- ties as the prospect of wartime demands encouraged plantings. Acreage reached a peak in 1942 and was high again in 1943, but wartime labor shortages per- mitted harvest of only a portion of the crop. Thus, harvested acreage dropped sharply. Since the war, plantings have fluctuated around 4,000 acres. Competi- tion from Mexico, which comes into pro- duction in midwinter (December to March), ahead of Imperial Valley, will probably influence future California early spring tomato acreage significantly. Yields of California early spring toma- toes have been trending strongly upward, principally because of improved varie- ties, more efficient plant spacing, better cultural practices, and the concentration of production in the hands of experi- enced growers. Thus, though acreage has held steady in recent years, total produc- tion has increased along with yields. Early summer tomatoes There have been several important de- velopments in total acreage and the re- location of acreage of early summer tomatoes in California. Acreage increased sharply in the late thirties, dipped slightly during World War II, and reached an all-time peak in 1946. Strong demand and a widening market encouraged this rapid expansion. Planted acreage continued high during the late forties, but a curly top epidemic in the San Joaquin Valley — particularly in 1949 and 1950 — drasti- cally reduced the harvested acreage. Fear of further losses held acreage down in 1951-53. Since then, acreage has again increased sharply. There has been a major shift in acre- age from southern California to the San Joaquin Valley. Urbanization, high land and water costs, and competition from other crops have forced growers out of the Los Angeles-Orange County area. Some of the decline in this area has been offset by increases in San Diego County. The big shift, however, has been north into the Tulare-Fresno and Merced areas of the San Joaquin Valley, where land and water costs are lower. Tomatoes in the Tulare-Fresno area are grown on stakes on the higher ground bordering the valley floor, where good air drainage maintains mild temperatures. These to- matoes reach the market in early June. Peak marketings follow the peak season in Coachella Valley. The largest volume of early summer tomatoes, however, is produced in the Merced area, for market- ing that begins near July 1. In about 1948, producers in the Merced area changed from growing tomatoes on stakes to growing them on the ground. They thereby sacrificed about two weeks in the early market, but reduced invest- ment and labor costs substantially. Since about 1954, early summer acreage has increased considerably in the Los Banos- Patterson area, in western Merced and Stanislaus counties. Low-cost water, re- cently made available, is expected to en- courage tomato acreage in this district. Yields of early summer tomatoes in- creased until 1954. Subnormal climate delayed harvest in 1955, produced er- ratic sizing, and reduced yields substan- tially. Heavy frost damage at the end of the 1956 season also caused relatively light yields. Total production, though subject to considerable year-to-year vari- ation, has increased. [66] 13,000 12.000 11,000 10,000 EARLY SUMMER TOMATOES: Acreage by districts, California 1 i ■ I J L j L 1935 1940 1945 1955 Year 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 - 6,000 4,000 1,600 o 1,200 o o o 1,000 c o •^ 800 1 I 1 f EARLY SUMMER TOMATOES: '/^-Product ion s ^a creage F 1 L Acreage, production and yield per acre, California J i i i i I i i i i I i i i i L 60 40 J I I L 1935 1940 1945 Year 1950 1955 [67] 22,000 - 1 1 EARLY FALL TOMATOES: 1 A 12,000 -C u < 10,000 - Southern California San Joaquin Valley / 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 \^ /'Central Coast j^"^ ^ / / / ...... r i r i — r w i — r ! i i i i V/ / V..... ""^.^ ' •^Sacramento Valley I i I 1 i i i i 1 " 1935 1940 1945 1950 Year EARLY FALL TOMATOES: Acreage, production and yield per acre, California ooo 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 I- 000 000 ooo |- 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 N ^ y V/ Yield y\ A^Acreage r > i \ I \ ^ / A / V \/ v \ " Early fall tomatoes The marketing of early fall tomatoes in California involves high risk, depend- ing a great deal on the date of the first frosts in the midwest and east, which end the tomato season there. Prices and acre- age therefore vary widely from year to year. However, acreage shows a general increase. There have been several important shifts in the location of acreage in the state. One major shift since World War II has been from the Sacramento Valley to the San Joaquin Valley. Low tempera- tures in the fall reduced the shipping quality of Sacramento Valley tomatoes and caused relocation of acreage farther south, mainly in the Stockton-Tracy- Patterson area, in San Joaquin and Stan- islaus counties. The Central Coast valleys have also declined in importance — in [68] some areas because of subdivision, and in other areas because of competition from alternative crops. Southern Cali- fornia acreage has varied widely, without any general trend. Possibilities for fu- ture expansion in southern California are limited by scarcities of land and water resources. Any sizable future in- creases will probably take place in the San Joaquin Valley, where land is rela- tively more available and disease damage less likely. Yields of California late fall tomatoes have increased since the early thirties. Contributing to the yield increase have been shifts to better soils and climate, im- proved cultural practices, and concentra- tion of production among efficient pro- ducers. Total production has increased as yields have increased. Changes in acreage California has grown in importance relative to other areas of the United States in processing tomatoes, increasing its share of national tonnage from about one fourth to one half in the last twenty years. The harvested acreage of process- ing tomatoes in California is normally about three times that of fresh tomatoes. Relatively high yields and good quality, and particularly the reliability of the California crop, have proved attractive to canners, who require a stable source. Most of the processing tomatoes in California are grown on direct contract with the processor; thus, the contract price, determined before planting, be- comes the effective sale price. Prices of- fered by canners are heavily influenced by carry-over and prospective demands. The acreage of processing tomatoes in California expanded greatly during World War II because of sharp increases in defense demands and the prices of- fered producers. Acreage dips during the war were primarily the result of labor shortages and low relative prices. Slack- ening in postwar demand led to large carry-overs and reduced prices, forcing acreage down in 1948-50. A sharp acre- age jump in 1951 reflects Korean War demand; a large acreage was planted again in 1952, but not all was harvested. These peaks in acreage and production were followed by several years of lower acreages as canners adjusted contracts to inventories. In 1956, however, acreage and production rebounded to record peaks. Shifts in location of production Processing tomato acreage increased sharply in three areas during World War II: the Sacramento Valley, the San Joa- quin Valley, and the Central Coast area. Since the war the Central Valley area has dominated and the acreage in the Central Coast has fallen off. The rela- tively higher yields in the Valley appear to have led to the shift. Southern Cali- fornia has never been an important seg- ment of the state industry. Trends in yields and production Yields of processing tomatoes have shown a relatively rapid and steady rise over the past 20 years. The most rapid rates of increase followed adoption of the Pearson or Pearson-type tomato, in about 1942. Producers switched to Pear- [69 150 140 130 120 HO 100 « 80 - i/l > TOMATOES, PROCESSING: Acreage by districts, California 1945 1950 1955 Year TOMATOES, PROCESSING: Acreage, production and yield per acre, California o 160 o o 140 — ' 120 & 100 V) o 60 10 40 a> u 20 < c 1 1 1 1 I Yield -^^ S - o * Jt^ ' ~ - v> 3,000 - o 2,500 _ *U 2,000 Acreage ^^' ' \ / ' \ f - - 1,500 t3 - _g 1,000 - S 500 / ^- ••**""~ - ' *" - """S-Production a- o T-7-*rT"7*r"^i , i , , i , , , , i i i i i i i 1935 1945 Year 1950 1955 20 ^ ■ 16 t '< -I 12 o o 10 3 • s - 2 -r >- [70] sons mainly because pickers preferred the smaller tomato. Several other devel- opments over the years have contributed to the rise: 1) Tomato plants have been spaced more closely. This practice in- creases the percentage of fruit that sets early. That increase does not add to yields directly; it does minimize the risk of losses from late-season rains. Other varieties are used to space out shipments to canneries. 2) Greater areas of land have been leveled, allowing better irriga- tion and more uniform yields over the field. 3) Heavy rates of fertilizer have been applied. 4) Producers have become more conscious of soil compaction problems. Production of processed tomatoes has increased. Acreage increases accounted for early rises in production, but yield increases have been the major cause lately. The postwar instability in produc- tion reflects drastic year-to-year changes in harvested acreage. R O ALFALFA HAY Hay occupies a greater acreage of Cal- ifornia land than any other single crop; alfalfa is California's most important cultivated forage crop. Alfalfa is grown commercially in every California county except San Francisco. Principal produc- ing areas are the San Joaquin and Sacra- mento valleys and southern California. In California, alfalfa is mainly an irri- gated crop, using three to six acre-feet of water per season, depending on soil, temperature, length of growing season, and other factors. Selected varieties are adapted to a wide range of soils and cli- mates. The winter-hardy Ladak and Grimm varieties have proved superior in the northern part of the state; California common and Caliverde (an improved California common) are the principal varieties grown in the rest of the state, except in southern California, where the variety Africa predominates. A substan- tial proportion of the alfalfa hay grown in California is produced as a cash crop for shipment to concentrated dairy-pro- ducing and livestock-feeding centers. The Los Angeles dry-lot dairy industry draws heavy shipments of alfalfa from the Im- perial Valley and the southern San Joa- quin Valley. Cattle feeding operations in the Imperial Valley, recently expanded, now utilize large tonnages of alfalfa hay. The production of certified alfalfa seed has also become an important and spe- cialized industry in recent years. Before 1946, alfalfa seed production in Cali- fornia varied between 2% and 5 million pounds annually; in 1956 it was 79 mil- lion pounds — nearly half the U. S. total. Alfalfa acreage in California has gen- erally increased since the mid-thirties. The increase has been tied closely to ex- pansion of the livestock industry in Cali- fornia, particularly the dairy industry. Acreage since 1950 has been heavily in- fluenced by cotton acreage allotments; [71] (SUO| JJOljS) 9JD0 Jdd p|3)X -N 1 ■n CO / ' ' CN — o 1 \ - D < — >* Q) X v 1 I Acreage, production and c? a> k. o < - V N \ "5 \ / \ - >- < I / X < /> N I 1 ALFALF 1 i i 1 1 o o o o o o o o o o o o O o o o o o o 1 1 V CO*" (suo* OOO'I) u o|P n P 1 1 1 1 1 CN 1 1 1 1 o a> - >- o o © o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o CM >— o o CO 1^ «o u-> ■*■ CO CN •~~ (SOJDD OOO'l) saJDD p3JS8AJ0|-| alfalfa acreage increases in 1950 and 1954^56 coincide with the imposition of cotton acreage controls. County data by years are not available, but the major alfalfa-producing districts have not changed in order of importance since 1930: the San Joaquin Valley, southern California, and the Sacramento Valley. Production within these areas is almost anywhere that irrigation water is available. The Imperial Valley, however, has the greatest single concentration of acreage. Advantages there are: 1) near- ness to the southern California dairy and beef feed-lot markets, and 2) the impor- tance of alfalfa as a cash crop in rotation with commercial vegetables. Alfalfa yields have generally increased since the late twenties. Yields over the state vary from two to ten tons per acre, depending on length of growing season, weather, soil conditions, and water sup- plies. The higher yields are not uncom- mon in the San Joaquin Valley and south- ern California, where more cuttings are possible per season. The gradual average yield increases in the state are probably accounted for by improved varieties, fer- tilization, and dusting and spray pro- grams. Damage by the spotted alfalfa aphid has depressed yields in the past few years. Total production has trended strongly upward. Changes in acreage Barley production in the United States is centered primarily in the North Cen- tral states, where it serves as a "catch crop" for spring wheat or as a crop in rotation with oats. A secondary produc- tion area is California, which in recent years has become the top barley-produc- ing state. Barley is by far the leading cereal crop in California, in most areas outyielding wheat, its chief competitor. Most of the California crop goes to live- stock feeding and feed manufacturing in- dustries in the state, but large tonnages are sold for malting, at a premium price over barley sold for feed. In general, breweries require a barley of proper va- riety, bright in color, plump and mel- low, and with high germination. Parts of California are particularly well adapted to the production of high-quality malt- ing barley. The western Sacramento Val- ley, the eastern side of the northern San Joaquin Valley, and the Tulelake district are particularly important. A sizable proportion (one tenth to one quarter) of California's barley is normally exported for malting and food purposes; Japan has taken major shipments for food in recent years. A declining percentage of California production is used by West Coast brewers, reflecting increased dis- tribution in Pacific Coast markets of beer produced from midwestern malt. Barley acreage and production in Cali- fornia reached an early peak just before World War I; at that time barley occu- pied large acreages in the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys. After World War I, expansion of irrigation in this area brought a shift from barley to higher-income crops. This development, along with Prohibition, depressed barley acreage during the twenties. Acreage and production rose during the thirties and later, as Prohibition ended and as farm- ers recognized that barley was a useful rotation crop for breaking disease and [73 2.000 1,800 1.600 1,400 1,200 BARLEY: Acreage by districts, California --*/ San Joaquin Valley ■ — ^__^ ^*\ .Sacramento Valley ..• ...•••••. # ._' Central Coast' ' I I I I I I I I L 1945 Year 1955 2.000 "w 1,500 8 0> 1,000 - 1 1 1 Production (100,000 bushels) to *. ov oo o o o o o o o o o 1 1 1 1 1 1 BARLEY: Acreage, production and yield per acre, California /w A / i A /XT ' r "*s/ ^* I / \ / ^V ^\ A V Acreage / > r V Production ' 1 l l I l 1 1 1 1 l 1 I 1 l I 1 l l I i 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 1935 1940 Year 1945 1955 pest cycles. In recent years, barley has increased in irrigated areas when higher- income crops (such as cotton) were limited by acreage restrictions or when water was insufficient for other crops. Shifts in location of production Barley acreage is distributed widely over the state. The San Joaquin Valley, [74 the Sacramento Valley, southern Cali- fornia (mainly Imperial and Riverside counties) , and the Central Coast counties of San Luis Obispo, Monterey, and San Benito rank in that order in barley acre- age. No major shifts are evident since 1938. Earlier figures are not available, but the San Joaquin Valley apparently supplanted the Sacramento Valley as the ] major barley area as emphasis shifted from malt barley to feed barley. The ef- fect of cotton acreage allotments on bar- ley acreage is clearly shown. Barley acreage in the San Joaquin Valley in- creased in the cotton allotment years 1950 and 1954^56 as many acres were diverted to barley. Removal of cotton allotments in 1951-53 depressed barley acreage sharply. Trends in yields and production Barley yields have gradually increased since 1940, apparently from increased use of fertilizer and herbicides, new va- rieties, and more timely planting. Year- to-year fluctuations in yields reflect changes in weather, particularly rainfall. Upward trends in both yields and acre- age account for the sharp increase in production over the years. CORN Only since 1954 has corn become an important field crop in California. Even with sharp acreage increases in 1954-56, California is not a major corn-producing state. It now accounts for less than one per cent of the total value of the U. S. corn crop. Corn was one of the first crops introduced into the state. However, with the technology and varieties then avail- able, it was considered poorly adapted to California conditions. Detailed figures are not available, but the location of pro- duction has changed somewhat. Before 1954 the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta area was the prime area. Since then, acreage has increased moderately in the Delta area and greatly in the cotton areas of the San Joaquin Valley. Growers restricted on cotton acreage have turned to corn as a relatively high- income alternative cash crop. Cotton al- lotments brought about a slight increase in corn acreage in 1950 and sharp in- creases in 1954^56, when cotton was again restricted. Several technical devel- opments in corn production increased yields during 1948-53 and set the stage for that sudden upsurge. The major de- velopments were: 1) a shift to hybrid corn varieties in about 1948; 2) develop- ment of proper irrigation and fertiliza- tion methods as well as other cultural practices; and 3) more widespread knowledge and experience among for- merly inexperienced growers. Increased yields since 1954 partly reflect the in- creased proportion of corn acreage grown on productive cotton lands of the San Joaquin Valley. With the recent in- creases in both acreage and yields, total corn production has more than quad- rupled from the 1950-53 level. In the fu- ture, corn acreage and production in Cal- ifornia will probably continue to be closely related to the cotton program. [75] (sjdijsnq) ajoo Jad ppi^ 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 — 0) o • __ u < V > __ y* A. — o 'E II — *"" o T3 • — U oT u o l_ 0) Q. It 1 \ 1 \ if • 1 1 1 _ TD \ 1 I 0) c D / V 1 / / 1 «. _ C o 1 I \ I \ — u 1 1 • "*■ 3 O 1 \ 1 — a. /\ • 1 — o <'') 1 § \ < - u < \ 1 \ \ \ - 2 I \ • O U \ 1 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i i 1 1 1 - o o o o CO «0 ^ CN o o o O CO nO 5 s o 1 1 1 (sp H snq 000 ' 00l )uo 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L_ o o - (sajDD 000 L) S8J:)D pa|saAJD|-j Changes in acreage The United States is the dominant cot- ton-producing country of the world. In the twenties it accounted for about half of world acreage and slightly over half of world production; by the mid-fifties it accounted for only about one fifth of world acreage but over one third of world production. An increasing proportion of U. S. cotton production has been used domestically — an average of about 60 per cent in the postwar years. U. S. cotton production has changed significantly in the last 30 years. Large reductions in acreage have been accom- panied by sharp yield increases, with production maintained at relatively high levels. In addition, important shifts have taken place between areas of the United States. The irrigated West (mainly Cali- fornia and Arizona) produced about 2 per cent of the U. S. total in the twenties, compared with about 20 per cent today. The Mississippi Delta areas and the high plains and lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas also increased in relative impor- tance. The traditional cotton areas of the southwest and southeast have produced a declining proportion of the total. Rela- tively high yields and mechanization of the crop have favored expansion in the West. In recent years California has be- come the third-ranking state in produc- tion, following Texas and Mississippi. Cotton is now by far the leading income crop in California. The growers have the advantage of producing high-quality, longer-staple upland cotton ( 1^ 6 inches or longer). The industry in the San Joaquin Valley is unique in that, by law, only the Acala variety has been grown since 1925. Commercial cotton production became well established in California after 1910, in the Imperial Valley at first. Produc- tion later concentrated in the southern portion of the San Joaquin Valley. Acre- age increased until World War II; high prices in the mid-thirties apparently in- duced acreage expansion, with peak acreage in 1937. Grower compliance with the cotton program reduced acreage in 1938. Acreage was static during World War II, with expansion restricted by price ceilings, shortages of harvest labor, and the relatively high priority of other crops. Immediately after, however, acre- age increased sharply. Curtailment of foreign production and high domestic support prices led to major development of irrigated cotton land in California be- tween 1945 and 1949. In 1950 acreage was restricted by allotment, but it in- creased sharply in the next three years. The rapid expansion in acreage in 1948- 51 partly reflected increased profitability resulting from machine picking. A large proportion of the California cotton crop is now machine harvested. Acreage allot- ments in 1954^-56 again sharply re- stricted California cotton acreage. Shifts in location of production As mentioned, cotton production in California first developed in the Imperial Valley in the early 1900's. Competition from vegetables and other crops in south- ern California and the development of a cotton variety well adapted to the San Joaquin Valley led to a shift. During the thirties and forties the San Joaquin Val- ley produced practically the entire Cali- fornia cotton crop. High postwar support prices and the discovery that formerly unproductive soils on the west side would produce high-yielding cotton under irri- gation led to a tremendous postwar ex- pansion of cotton acreage in the San Joaquin Valley. A sharp increase in cot- ton acreage in southern California (mainly Imperial and Riverside coun- [77] 1,400 1,300 1,200 1,100 1,000 900 h V) 0) u 800 o -a a> *- VI ;oo 9) > w O X 600 500 400 300 200 100 - COTTON: Acreage by districts, California I I I f*l I I I I I I L/l ' LJ L 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 Year W 1,400 (D u 1,300 O 1.200 °_ 1,000 ^ 900 V) J> 800 O o 700 15 600 <2 500 > o 400 X 300 200 100 1,950 _ ^ 1,800 V) J2 1,650 o -° 1,500 =£ 1,350 § 1,200 IT) o 1<050 o 900 w 750 O 600 ^ 450- o 300 °" 150 COTTON: Acreage, production and yield per acre, California Ml / x *~^i ^^^^-Production I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 200 1930 1935 1940 1945 Year 1950 1955 [78] ties) in 1951-53 reflects 1) an attempt by growers to build acreage "history" in anticipation of possible allotments, and 2) increased uncertainties of yields and prices for important competing south- ern California crops. Acreage allotments after 1953 caused acreage cuts in both the San Joaquin Valley and southern California. Trends in yields and production Yields trended steadily upward from the late twenties through the thirties, reaching an early peak in 1940 under ex- ceptionally favorable weather. During World War II yields were depressed by labor shortages and unfavorable weather. Yields later increased again, but with major annual fluctuations. High yields in 1950 resulted from plantings on better soils and from more timely culture prac- tices under restrictions of cotton allot- ments. Depressed yields in 1951-53 re- sulted from expansion to lower-quality lands, less intensive cultural practices, and rather unfavorable weather. In 1954-56 cotton allotments once again forced cotton to the most productive soils and encouraged better care on a smaller acreage. Record yields resulted. The gen- eral long-time increase in cotton yields is attributed to increased use of fertilizer, irrigation, more effective disease and insect control, and other improved prac- tices. Total cotton production in Cali- fornia closely follows acreage trends and can be explained by the interaction of acreage and yields. Changes in acreage The three main rice-growing regions of the U. S. are 1) the prairie region of southwestern Louisiana and southeastern Texas, 2) the prairie region of eastern Arkansas, and 3) the Central Valley of California. In the past, California pro- duced about one fifth of the U. S. supply of rice. Most of the California acreage is confined to the lower Sacramento Valley, where soil and climate are well adapted to rice culture. The heavy clay soils of the Sacramento Valley require relatively less water for flooding, and dry out quickly after draining, thereby facili- tating harvest with heavy equipment. Relatively level land allows large checks and efficient use of machinery in this highly mechanized industry. Ample low- cost water, good drainage, and hot sum- mers also favor rice there. Most of the commercial rice grown in California is of the high-yielding, short-grain variety. Short-grain rice is better accepted in foreign markets (Puerto Rico and the Far East, for example) than in the do- mestic market. Only about 10 to 20 per cent of the California crop is used domestically. Commercial rice production began in California in 1912 and increased rapidly during World War I. In the inter-war period, California rice acreage was main- tained at about 100,000 to 150,000 acres. Both the U. S. and California rice indus- tries expanded during and after World War II. War in the Far East severed main rice trade routes and encouraged rice production in the United States. Wartime exports to allies and postwar relief shipments to distressed nations were heavy. By the early fifties, however, rice production in foreign countries had [79] 500 RICE: Acreage by districts, California — i — i — i — r — I — 1 1 i i L I I I I i i \«„^ 1940 1955 Year 1 i 1 1 1 i\ Acreage —^ j \ RICE: Acreage, production and yield per acre, California ^~**7 \ i \ Yield 200 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1930 1940 Year 1950 1955 largely recovered and prices in the world market dropped. Consequently, acreage allotments were imposed in the United States beginning in 1955. The peak acre- ages of 1953 and 1954 were, in part, the result of growers' attempts to obtain acreage "history" as allotments threat- ened. [80 Shifts in location of production The important rice-producing counties in the Sacramento Valley are Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Sutter, and Yolo; Yuba and Sacramento counties have been less important. Several counties in the north- ern San Joaquin Valley (principally San ] Joaquin, Merced, and Fresno counties) have increased rice acreage in recent years. Kern County (Buttonwillow area) rice acreage increased sharply in 1954, and has since been relatively important. Most of the large war and postwar in- creases in California rice acreage, how- ever, have been in the well-adapted Sac- ramento Valley area. High prices and the threat of acreage allotments brought on large-scale land reclamation in the Sacra- mento Valley in 1954. In the San Joaquin Valley, rice was grown on some poorer soils. Large quantities of water were ap- plied to these soils to leach out salts. Rice was grown on many of these soils during the leaching process. Allotments sharply reduced acreage in both areas in 1955 and 1956. Trends in yields and production Rice yields in California have been highly variable, with little uptrend, if any, until 1955 and 1956. Yield variabil- ity is highly associated with weather; temperatures during pollinization are particularly critical. For example, low yields in 1953-54 were partly attribut- able to low summer temperatures and delayed maturity. Maturity delays have also resulted from the colder water sup- plied from operation of the Shasta Dam. This phenomenon is particularly critical in checks near the irrigation inlet. Another yield-depressing factor in 1953 was a serious leaf miner infestation. Major factors in the 1954 yield decline were the expansion of rice acreage to poorer soils and the inclusion of inex- perienced growers. The 1955 and 1956 yield increases reflect reverse shifts. Total rice production in California has followed the general upward trend in acreage since 1940. Yield increases in 1955 and 1956 nearly offset the sharp drop in acreage, with the result that pro- duction was maintained almost at the peak 1953-54 levels. Nitrogen place- ment, green manuring, more timely field operations, and better soil management have contributed to yield increases in the last two years and are expected to be of increasing importance as approved practices are adopted more widely. GRAIN SORGHUMS Grain sorghum was introduced early into California, mainly as a dryland crop in many areas of the interior valleys. More recently, grain sorghum has been a high-producing irrigated summer crop. In double-cropping plans, grain sorghum may follow barley in the Sacramento Valley or early potatoes in Kern County. California now ranks third or fourth in production of grain sorghum, its position changing from year to year. However, the Texas-Oklahoma area far surpasses California in total acreage and produc- tion. Yields in irrigated areas of Cali- fornia are about double those in the major dryland producing areas, but costs are considerably higher. In addition, there are fewer possible alternatives to grain sorghum in the major producing areas outside California. Grain sorghum acreage in California remained at about 80,000 acres in the late twenties, rose through the thirties, and reached a peak of 204,000 acres in 1941. Acreage declined through the forties, and after 1953 increased rapidly. Acreage allotments for cotton since 1954 have brought major shifts to grain sor- ghum as well as to other crops. Pre- liminary figures for 1957 indicate the [81] (spijsnq) ojod jad ppij^ o *r> o *rt © m o m © - 1 WHEAT: 1 i | Acreage by districts California - \ S ,ate \ >^^v ^******^\. ^v — 200 100 N S ^ San Joaquin Valley Central Coast ^^_ ^nrmmpntn Vnllpv^^ 1 ^^ ~i ^~'« ■ ■ 'Southern California J I t l 1 I i I I Yeor 1950 1955 1 lll,l| 'WHEAT: Acreage, production and yield per acre, California ~ 4,000 A x Acreage 900 3,600 J <^ Yield 800 ~ ^ 3,200 - V) n\A rk 1 ] \\ / A> \ — /^-y J\l 700 600 ~ 3 2,800 _D O ~ O 2,400 : \ Production x 500 1 ction (10 O O o 400 -o 1,600 - 300 200 O 1,200 800 - A A / V A A ■ J s A <-> .-. AA 100 400 - o I I 1 I 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I- 25 20 15 10 a> in