regulatory costs make California production uneconomic, acreage moves or disappears. The jobs follow it. Automation also does not eliminate the need for people. It changes the work. Autonomous equipment must be programmed, monitored, maintained, repaired, transported and integrated into complex farming operations. These are safer and often better- paying jobs than many of the repetitive tasks the equipment replaces. The right policy is to help agricultural employees develop those skills, not to preserve every existing task indefinitely by law. California can authorize autonomous agricultural equipment while adopting reasonable protections. Training and upskilling can help affected employees move into new positions. Equipment can be required to satisfy recognized safety standards, operate within designated zones, maintain incident data and include effective emergency controls. Those protections would address legitimate worker concerns without making autonomous agriculture practically impossible. Lead or Get Out of the Field California prides itself on being the home of innovation. That claim rings hollow when the state welcomes agricultural technology at conferences, funds research at its universities and then bars growers from using the finished product in their fields. The question is not whether autonomous agricultural equipment is coming. It is whether California farms will be allowed to use it before their competitors do. Lawmakers should expressly authorize autonomous tractors and direct Cal/OSHA to establish clear, performance-based safety standards. The rules should protect workers, allow responsible deployment and give manufacturers and growers enough certainty to invest. California can lead the next agricultural revolution, or it can regulate that revolution into another state or country. It cannot do both. The greatest threat to California farm jobs is not an empty tractor seat. It’s an empty field.
A Field Is Not a Freeway The state also should resist importing the debate over driverless trucks and robotaxis into agriculture. An autonomous tractor moving slowly within a defined field is not an 80,000-pound truck traveling on Interstate 5. It is not a Waymo navigating pedestrians, bicycles, traffic signals and public intersections. Agricultural equipment operates in controlled environments where access, routes, speed and work zones can be carefully managed by the employer. Some opponents are less concerned about how autonomous tractors operate than about whether they operate at all. Beneath many of the safety arguments is a more basic fear that automation will displace workers. That concern deserves an honest response. Technology changes jobs, and some tasks will require fewer people. Pretending otherwise would undermine the case for reform. But refusing to automate will not preserve agricultural jobs if the farm itself becomes uncompetitive. California growers do not sell into a protected market. Buyers can obtain produce from other states: Mexico, South America and elsewhere. When labor and Different risks call for different rules. Protecting Jobs by Losing Them "The question is not whether autonomous agricultural equipment is coming. It is whether California farms will be allowed to use it before their competitors do."
AGRICULTURE LAND INVESTMENT SALES
ARIZONA & CALIFORNIA
Bobby Wuertz Agriculture Land Advisor bwuertz@landadvisors.com 520.251.1210
landadvisors.com
7 Western Grower & Shipper | www.wga.com October – December 2026
Made with FlippingBook Annual report maker