An act to amend Section 10331 of Sections 10332 and 10334 of, and to add Section 10334.5 to, the Public Resources Code, relating to land protection. protection, and making an appropriation therefor.
AB 1311 expands and funds California’s Rangeland, Grazing Land, and Grassland Protection Program by appropriating $400 million from Proposition 4 bond proceeds to the Wildlife Conservation Board. The money would be used as grants to eligible land trusts, local public agencies, state agencies, and nonprofit conservation organizations to acquire perpetual conservation easements on privately owned rangeland, grazing land, and grassland that support food and fiber production and provide ecosystem services such as wildfire fuel reduction, groundwater recharge, wildlife habitat, and open vistas.
The bill also updates program definitions and administration. It defines eligible entities as accredited land trusts with the capacity to complete acquisitions and stewardship obligations, clarifies what qualifies as protected property, and authorizes the board to partner with USDA-certified land trusts under the federal Agricultural Conservation Easement Program. The bill sets deadlines for disbursing funds, completing acquisitions, and recording easements, and it directs the board to distribute funding across specified regions of the state, with limited flexibility to reallocate funds if demand is insufficient in a region.
AB 1311 would amend Public Resources Code sections governing the California Rangeland, Grazing Land, and Grassland Protection Program and add a new section appropriating bond funds for implementation. It would not create a new land-use regulatory program, but it would substantially expand the state’s conservation-easement financing for working lands by dedicating $400 million from the Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparedness, and Clean Air Fund to the Wildlife Conservation Board. The bill would affect land trusts, ranchers, agricultural landowners, and public conservation agencies by increasing the availability of state-backed funding for voluntary easements that keep land in private ownership while restricting development.
The overall sentiment appears strongly favorable. The bill received a unanimous 14-0 do-pass vote in committee and was advanced with a recommendation to the consent calendar, suggesting broad bipartisan or at least noncontroversial support at that stage. The bill’s findings frame it as a climate, wildfire, biodiversity, and agricultural resilience measure, which likely contributes to its positive reception among conservation and working-lands stakeholders.
The main policy tension is between conservation funding and the use of large bond proceeds for private-land easements. Supporters emphasize that the program preserves working lands, supports ranching and food production, and advances the state’s 30x30 biodiversity goal while keeping land on the tax rolls and under private stewardship. Potential concerns, though not reflected in recorded opposition in the provided materials, could include the size of the appropriation, the regional allocation formula, whether funds should prioritize other bond purposes, and whether the program sufficiently balances public benefits with private landowner participation and long-term stewardship obligations.