Thus the urgency, he argued, of “grabbing places like this and putting them into conservation, while you still can.” The vistas of Point Conception may not have the same iconic impact as the Grand Canyon or Yosemite, he said. “But ecologically it is just as important”—because of the diversity of flora and fauna, because of its nearly unspoiled aspect. “We have the splendor of the national parks because they were set aside 100 years ago in a park system. It gives me a kind of solace to think that more of these areas will be protected.”

Beyond solace, the Dangermonds hope that UCSB and The Nature Conservancy will together make Point Conception a unique digital-research center for the identification and protection of similarly important and endangered ecological hotspots around the world. They’ll have help from Esri’s software, which they believe will allow them to measure and analyze trends, good and bad, more extensively than in any comparable site.

“This really is a pivotal point to be envisaging how new technologies might be employed to gather the data in support of research,” Chancellor Yang wrote to me. “Many new Earth-observing satellites have been launched in recent years, with the ability to scan the surface more frequently and in more detail. We have a wide range of sensors that can be installed on, below, and above the land surface; we have new computer models that can take these data inputs and process them to make accurate predictions of the impacts of conservation strategies.”

* * *

The second significant aspect of the purchase is the example the Dangermonds hope to set for their fellow rich people. This donation is unusual not simply in its scale but also because the Dangermonds are publicizing it, something they usually take pains not to do.

For a long time, Jack and Laura Dangermond have been the wealthiest family in their small community of Redlands, and its leading philanthropic donors. Since their Esri company is still privately held, the precise extent of the Dangermonds’ wealth is also private. Jack told me that published estimates, in the low to mid billions, are “exaggerated.” Whatever the details, they are people of means. But their previous gifts have been unpublicized and often anonymous. Their names don’t appear at all, or only in fine print, at many of the local institutions they support.

In contrast, this tract of land will be the Jack and Laura Dangermond Preserve, and the professor at UCSB will hold the Jack and Laura Dangermond Chair. Why?

“We’re very intentionally setting out a model that we hope other people with money will follow,” Jack Dangermond said. “We’d like people to think, ‘Let’s do what the Dangermonds did.’ We’d like them to copy us.”

“There are lots of wealthy people in the tech industry in California and elsewhere,” he said. “America’s wealthy people are flush with money. They’re wondering where to put it”—and the favored emphases of this era’s tech leaders include education and public health. “Those are great! But we haven’t yet seen that kind of commitment to nonpolitical conservation issues.” He gave the example of the Rockefeller family a century ago, who devoted some of their assets to preserving land in New York, in Maine, in Wyoming, in many other places that eventually adjoined or became part of national or state parks.

The Nature Conservancy

He is aware of the complications of this private-philanthropy model for conservation: the baronial overtones, the theoretical superiority of having the government take the lead with truly national parks, like the Grand Canyon or Yellowstone. But to put it mildly, that’s not what the federal government is doing these days. In the weeks before the Point Conception announcement, Donald Trump ordered the the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase–Escalante national monuments reduced in size. When I asked Michael Sweeney why the state or federal government hadn’t bought the ranch long ago—including through the defense budget, since Vandenberg Air Force Base is next door—he said, “Because it just would never happen. The price is an obstacle. There are too many agencies to coordinate.”