University of California

Landowners, while pleased with agricultural easements, suggest improvements


Ellen Rilla

Publication Information

Hilgardia 56(1):21-25. DOI:10.3733/ca.v056n01p21. January 2002.

PDF of full article, Cite this article


We extensively interviewed 46 landowners in two northern Bay Area counties and nearby Yolo County to assess their satisfaction with agricultural conservation easements. The landowners in most cases were enthusiastic sellers of the easements; their motivations included cash, keeping land in the family and conservation. They reported generally satisfactory experiences with the easement programs. To a lesser degree they expressed concerns about certain aspects of the easement process, especially negotiations and monitoring, and suggested ways that easement programs can improve their relationships with landowners.


Bowers D. Annual survey of local programs. Farmland Preservation Report (Street, MD). 2001. 11(9):1-6.

Elconin P, Luzadis VA. Evaluating Landowner Satisfaction with Conservation Restrictions. SUNY College Environ Sci and Forestry (Syracuse, NY). 1997. Montpelier, VT: Vermont Land Trust.

Maynard LJ, Kelsey TW, Lembeck SM, Becker JC. Early experience with Pennsylvania's agricultural conservation easement program. J Soil Water Conserv. 1998. 53(2):106-12.

Rilla E, Sokolow AD. California Farmers and Conservation Easements: Motivations, Experiences and Perceptions in Three Counties. UC Agricultural Issues Center, California Farmland and Open Space Policy Series, Research Paper 4 2000. 49.

Sherman RL, Milshaw S, Wagner RC, Freedgood J. Investing in the Future of Agriculture: The Massachusetts Farmland Protection Program and the Permanence Syndrome. 1998. Northhampton, MA: American Farmland Trust. 75.

Rilla E. 2002. Landowners, while pleased with agricultural easements, suggest improvements. Hilgardia 56(1):21-25. DOI:10.3733/ca.v056n01p21
Webmaster Email: wsuckow@ucanr.edu