Committee advances bill to create voluntary farmland conservation-easement program (HB 1234)

Representative Culp introduced House Bill 1234 to the House Agriculture Committee, proposing a framework to allow willing farmland owners to donate or bequeath agricultural conservation easements so their land remains in agricultural use.

The bill would establish an agricultural land-protection program that allows landowners to convey development rights while retaining ownership and equity. Under the proposal the Indiana State Department of Agriculture (ISDA) could accept and hold easements; counties and private land trusts would also be permitted to operate local programs. The proposal, as drafted and presented to the committee, does not include a state appropriation to buy easements.

Why it matters: Witnesses and staff cited ISDA’s 2023 inventory of lost farmland, which found roughly 345,000 acres lost in Indiana between 2010 and 2022. Chris Reynolds, Midwest regional director for American Farmland Trust, told the committee that continued loss of productive acres threatens the state’s farm economy and that similar programs in other states leverage federal, state and philanthropic funding to protect farmland.

What supporters said: Chris Reynolds said the bill would “give farmers and landowners the option to protect their land for future generations” and noted that 29 other states have programs enabling conservation easements. Caitlin Smith of the Indiana Farm Bureau described the bill as a voluntary tool that would “give insurance to that farmer that the land will continue to be utilized for production.” Witness David Harden, a sixth-generation farmer, said an easement could help with estate planning by capturing the development-value differential so a family can provide for heirs who do not farm.

Program design and implementation: Testimony outlined these central elements:

- Eligible landowners could donate or bequeath a conservation easement; appraisals would value land both as farmland and at its development value, and the difference would represent the easement value. - ISDA would be authorized to accept and hold easements but staff told the committee that ISDA’s ability to implement the program would be contingent on receiving additional staffing and resources. Quentin Hayes, ISDA’s legislative director, said ISDA could implement the program “if we were provided some additional staffing and resources.” - Counties may establish their own conservation-easement programs, and private land trusts (for example, the Benjamin Harrison Land Trust) could hold easements without involving state government. - The bill would create an Ag Conservation Easement Fund intended to leverage federal funds (including USDA/Natural Resources Conservation Service programs and farm-bill resources) and philanthropic matching to pay for easement purchases where funds are available.

Questions and limits: Committee members pressed on implementation, asking how the program would operate without a state appropriation. Hayes reiterated that the bill does not obligate the state to fund purchases and that land trusts remain an option for landowners who prefer non‑state holders. Supporters said federal matching funds are available but that Indiana may need some state-level capacity or matching dollars to fully leverage those opportunities.

Committee action: A motion was made to pass HB 1234 as amended; the committee recorded multiple yes votes and at least two no votes during the roll call. (Roll-call items are recorded in the committee transcript.)

Nut graf: The bill responds to a state inventory showing significant farmland loss and would create a voluntary mechanism for landowners who want to remove development rights from their property while keeping the land in agricultural use. Supporters said the program could expand access to federal easement programs, aid succession planning for family farms and help keep farmland affordable for beginning farmers.

Ending: Supporters urged the committee to advance the measure so Indiana could become eligible for federal matching and philanthropic funding; ISDA said it could administer the program if provided resources. Committee members discussed possible technical changes and political-balance language for the oversight board and signaled opportunities to amend the bill on second reading.