WACD testified in opposition to HB 2154

On Wednesday, January 14, 2026, WACD Executive Director Tom Salzer testified in opposition to House Bill 2154 titled: “Concerning land ownership by conservation districts.”

Testifying alongside Tom was Don Gourlie with the Puget Sound Partnership. Don stressed the importance of local conservation districts and land/easement acquisitions in order to accomplish Puget Sound recovery.

Here is the text of Tom’s testimony. Several questions were asked after Tom delivered this prepared statement:

Good morning, members of the Local Government Committee. I am Tom Salzer, Executive Director of the Washington Association of Conservation Districts. WACD is opposed to HB 2154.

Conservation districts are a type of special purpose district with a directive to conserve the natural resources of our state. They were created in response to the ecological disaster of the Dust Bowl in the 1930s and have been helping local communities ever since.

Conservation districts operate on a voluntary basis in their local communities, with no regulatory or taxing authority, to address identified natural resource concerns.

Conversion of productive lands is a growing concern for many conservation districts, for our state’s farmers, ranchers, and timber growers, and for environmental groups, as more and more areas of the state are experiencing pressure to convert such lands to non-productive uses. According to the 2022 US Farm Census, more than 824,000 acres of ag land in Washington State was taken out of production between 2017 and 2022. For context, that amount of land is approximately the size of Walla Walla County. That is land that is no longer producing food.

Conservation districts believe landowners should have the most and best tools available to them, including the ability to donate or sell their land to whoever they wish. HB 2154 directly restricts those rights.

Conservation districts are responding to this land conversion crisis by striving to protect remaining farmland through partnerships, land donations, grant funding, conservation easements, and other methods. Removing these tools from the conservation district toolbox will reduce our state’s ability to preserve agricultural land now and for future generations.

Most of the questions asked revolved around two themes: (1) isn’t private land ownership the preferred way to operate farms for generations, and (2) do districts participate in land acquisitions with other agencies like DNR and Fish and Wildlife?

Additional helpful, informative testimony was provided by Sarah Moorehead (Thurston CD), Dave Hedrick (Ferry CD), and Jennifer Boie (Palouse CD).

Based on what we heard, we have some opportunities to help educate the Local Government Committee members. They have asked for some specific information on districts that own more than 20 acres of land in active agricultural use, and we’ll be responding to that request in the very near future.

We did receive input from some conservation districts (thank you!) but much of it came after we had vetted our testimony with our consultant. We ended up being on the Committee’s morning meeting agenda fairly early so there just wasn’t time to incorporate all of the input and keep our testimony under the two-minute time limit.