USMCA extension – Gov. Katie Hobbs urges extending USMCA, saying free trade is vital for Arizona agriculture, while weighing water impacts and tariff risks.
A looming decision on whether the U.S., Mexico and Canada should extend USMCA is putting Arizona agriculture at the center of a complicated fight over trade, tariffs and water.
Arizona Gov.. Katie Hobbs said Friday that extending the USMCA free-trade agreement is critical for the state’s agricultural economy.. She also cautioned that any trade benefits have to be weighed against the realities of Arizona’s water use. including not only how much water is consumed but who ends up benefiting from the resulting crop production.
The timing is tight. Under the USMCA framework, the three countries must decide this year whether to extend the deal until 2042 or allow it to sunset in 2036 after a fast-moving review process.
Hobbs’s comments land amid continued pressure from the Trump administration to pursue tariffs—taxes on imported goods—as a way to protect domestic producers.. The governor pushed back on the idea that free trade automatically harms the United States. arguing instead that trade policies should be designed to keep benefits focused on Americans and on states like Arizona.
For Arizona farmers and dairy producers, the stakes are not abstract.. Casa Grade dairy farmer Jim Boyle said the scale of exports has grown dramatically since the negotiations that led to NAFTA in the mid-1990s.. He pointed to national dairy export figures as evidence of how expanded access to markets has translated into larger sales over time.
Arizona agriculture officials also tied the benefits of USMCA to geography and production cycles.. Paul Brierley, director of the Arizona Department of Agriculture, said the agreement helps the state take advantage of its climate.. He contrasted production limits in Canada—where snow and winter conditions affect year-round vegetable cultivation—with Arizona’s ability to grow crops like cantaloupes. tree nuts and dates. then exchange those products across the continent.
Brierley described the practical payoff for consumers as well: year-round access to food that arrives from different regions when it is most feasible to produce. In that framing, USMCA becomes less about one crop winning and more about seasonal timing and shared supply.
Yet Hobbs said a major concern remains even if USMCA is extended.. After meeting with U.S.. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. she said the indication from the trade office was that tariffs would still be on the table under a renewed agreement.. That is, she said, troubling for everyone involved in cross-border commerce.
Boyle echoed that worry directly, arguing that tariffs damage farmers.. He said U.S.. farmers are highly productive and already produce more food than the country consumes. which he argued is a key reason they can help supply markets beyond U.S.. borders.. In his view, tariffs would raise barriers that make that broader role harder to sustain.
On water, Hobbs said she hopes federal decision-makers consider how Arizona farmers fit into the national food supply.. She specifically pointed to the Bureau of Reclamation’s role in determining who bears the burden of cutbacks in water from the Colorado River. a system that supports farming in the Yuma area and contributes substantially to the nation’s vegetable production.
But Arizona’s irrigation reality is also more complicated than a single river.. Much of the state’s agriculture relies on groundwater. and Hobbs raised questions about whether growing certain water-intensive crops in the desert makes sense.. She also acknowledged that some uses of groundwater may be inappropriate. including in her view what prompted a state decision related to land leasing.
Hobbs said she canceled the lease of state-owned land by Fondomonte. which was growing alfalfa to feed dairy cattle in the Middle East.. However, she noted that the company continued farming on private land, prompting legal action by Attorney General Kris Mayes.. The attorney general’s lawsuit accuses Fondomonte of creating a nuisance because of the amount of groundwater being pumped.
The dispute is still pending in Maricopa County Superior Court, leaving open how the state will balance agricultural activity with groundwater protections.
Even as she raised concerns about water-intensive agriculture. Hobbs said she does not believe the state should dictate what farmers grow.. She pointed to Arizona’s history of agricultural innovation in water conservation. suggesting that farmers have a role to play in figuring out how to adapt rather than complying with a one-size-fits-all directive.
Still, the policy question extends beyond what farms plant and into whether Arizona should grow certain crops at all.. Brierley said that broader decision is not something the state should decide from the top down.. In his view. economics should drive crop choices: farmers understand their production costs. their markets and the limits under which they must operate.
To Brierley, the economics also challenge the assumption that groundwater-fed alfalfa is inherently inefficient.. He cited a study about how much Colorado River water it takes to generate $1. 000 in agricultural output. saying the figures point to lower water requirements in Arizona compared with Upper Basin states.. He also framed groundwater issues as a matter of managing available limits rather than assuming that growing water-intensive crops automatically undermines agricultural logic.
Brierley also rejected the idea that allowing alfalfa production with Arizona groundwater for use in feeding cattle elsewhere amounts to subsidizing other states and other countries.. He described it as trade, arguing that companies pursue the best market for the products they produce.. He said the flow is not one-directional either, with Arizona importing goods that were produced using water elsewhere.
For Brierley, the broader rule is that government should stay out of those market decisions whenever possible. He said he is a “free market” believer, arguing that markets tend to eliminate options that do not make sense over time.
The economic case for USMCA is being made by a national trade-focused organization as well.. Farmers for Free Trade. which says it informs the public about the benefits of expanded opportunities for American farmers. points to Arizona’s recent export numbers to Mexico and Canada.. Its fact sheet says Arizona exported $1.1 billion in agricultural products to those countries in 2025. with vegetables and melons and fruits and tree nuts leading the breakdown.
The picture is also portrayed as two-way trade.. Data prepared by the Arizona Commerce Authority for 2024—the most recent year available—shows Arizona imported nearly $2.1 billion in melons and vegetables and about $487 million in fruits and tree nuts.. Brierley said that reflects agriculture’s seasonal nature. where Arizona may export certain products during peak periods and import others when production makes more sense elsewhere.
With USMCA’s extension decision looming and tariffs still a potential complication. Arizona’s political debate is already spanning the full chain from farm economics to federal trade strategy—while also circling back to the state’s most pressing resource question: how to keep agriculture viable without allowing water burdens to fall unevenly.
USMCA extension Arizona agriculture Katie Hobbs tariffs groundwater trade with Mexico Canada Colorado River water