The growth of the private land trust movement in the United
States has often been cited as a premier example of Alexis de
Tocqueville’s insight regarding the American genius for forming
voluntary associations to achieve common goals, avoiding both the
perils of hyper-individualism and an intrusive government. When
done properly, these trusts or conservancies typify the best of
what is sometimes
called “free market’ environmentalism.
Land trusts engage in entirely free-market transactions
with willing landowners who are able to sell or donate the
development rights on all or part of their land in return for
compensation or favorable tax treatment. They grant a conservation
easement to the land trust which is responsible for protecting the
easement for generations to come.
Such easements can be for purposes of soil and water
conservation, aesthetics, wildlife corridors or preservation of
rural and agricultural life-or all of the above.
The first land trust was established in 1891 in
Massachusetts, by the landscape architect Charles Eliot, to
preserve 20 acres of woodland. By 1950 there were still only 53
such trusts in 26 states. Today, there are similar trusts or
conservancies in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and
Puerto Rico.
In 1951, the Nature
Conservancy was incorporated as a nonprofit entity which,
notwithstanding past controversy over some of its transactions,
became the Ohio-class boomer of land trusts both nationally and
internationally. The amazing growth of this institution, warts and
all, has been chronicled by Bill Birchard in his informative
book, Nature’s
Keepers: The Remarkable Story of How the Nature Conservancy
Became the Largest Environmental Organization in the
World (2005). Birchard is a journalist who covers
both management and environmental issues. His book captures the
meteoric growth and growing pains of this major institution of
civil society.
The last 2005 National Land Trust Census, conducted by the
Land Trust Alliance
(LTA), documented the truly remarkable growth of these nonprofit
institutions between 2000 and 2005 and their paramount role in
America’s conservation movement.
That Census, released back in November 30, 2006, revealed
amazing growth in this private-sector movement. Total acres
conserved by local, state, and national trusts doubled to 37
million acres over those five years. According to LTA this was an
area 16 ½ times the size of Yellowstone National Park. Moreover,
the number of land trusts grew to 1,667, a 32 percent increase over
the same period.
At the end of 2011, LTA
released its new 2010 National Land Trust Census for the period
from 2005 to 2010, which covers conservation work right through the
depths of the Great Recession of 2008. Incredibly, the new data
indicate that private land trusts protected 10 million acres over
those five years, totaling 47 million acres-an area the size of
Washington state. Wendy Koch of USA Today
notes that this is a jump of 27 percent since 2005.
The new Census shows that, while the number of land trusts
has stabilized, the number of active volunteers increased by 70
percent since 2005.
The land trust movement is not just buying land. It is
also paying attention to monitoring its investment given its legal,
fiduciary and tax obligations in terms of ongoing stewardship. So
it is encouraging that between 2005 and 2010 trusts more than
doubled the amount of funding they have dedicated to monitoring,
stewardship and legal defense. This was backed up by almost a
tripling of their operating endowments.
This writer is privileged to serve on the board of the
Potomac Conservancy,
which operates in targeted areas in Virginia, Maryland, and West
Virginia with 12,200 acres now under easements. It has established
a Stewardship Endowment just for these purposes. Conservation
requires dedication and long-time horizons which, in turn, require
raising additional private support and contributions.
The strength of the conservancy movement, even amidst
these hard economic times, is edifying both as an indication of the
commitment of many Americans to stewardship and of the health of
the nation’s civil society, private institutions and philanthropic
spirit.
Back in 1835 Tocqueville observed that “Wherever at the
head of some new undertaking you see the government in France, or a
man of rank in England, in the United States you will be sure to
find an association.”
May it ever be so.
Bob K.| 3.5.12 @ 10:12AM
Mr Mehan,
Coincidentally there was an article today about the actions of a Land Trust in a major newspaper in the Marcellus Shale Gas region of NE Pennsylvania. It criticizes their action to approve the exploration for natural gas by the "fracking" method under land which was gifted to the Trust for conservation purposes. This type of activity was apparently against the wishes of the giftor and the question of their ethics surrounding this decision was raised in the article. You can read it here:
http://citizensvoice.com/news/.....z1oFjTJQUi
There also remains the possibility of the Land Trust making much money from this decision. The Land Trust responded in the article by giving reasons why they took this action.
I wonder what Toqueville would have thought of this type of stewardship?
Bob K.| 3.5.12 @ 10:30AM
It should be noted that this property was gifted to the Land Trust in a Will. It received the decedents entire estate which was valued at $3million dollars.
As the manager of the Land Trust states at the end of the article about what lies ahead: "It's a crapshoot. It really is."
Joe D.| 3.5.12 @ 5:34PM
It is amazing how much land is in trust or with the state/federal government unable to be used for growth. Do these groups pay any taxes on this land. Do they ever sale this land so we as a country can grow?
Bob K.| 3.5.12 @ 6:56PM
There apparently are different ways to do these trusts, which is why lawyers are required when they are made. The author of this article is a lawyer and could address these questions.
I know of one case where a "conservancy easement" was purchased in land by a Land Trust which prohibits the sale and development of the conserved land. The ownership remains with the lessor and they must pay for any legal costs that might arise from questions arising from their ownership such as disputes over rights of ways. They also must pay the assessed taxes on the land.
phil| 3.5.12 @ 11:00PM
In a country that has a 16 trillion dollar debt, more trillions in obligations than anyone can count; why do we take tax revenues and gift them to wealthy individuals in the form of conservation easements and other tax dodges? If these high minded people want to be charitable; pay the taxes, take whats left and do good. The average person has to pay higher taxes to subsidize these so called donations. If there are public benefits to be had from taking land off the tax rolls, it should be decided legislatively.
POST American| 3.5.12 @ 11:09PM
---Tavistock SOFT programming for
'Agenda 21' and 'AWE---stare--'IT'--he'.
'Stewardship?' --implying subjecthood and, of
course, an over lord.
Cut to the chase:
CALL for the IMMEDIATE EXIT from and
EXPLUSION of the unelected, PRIVATE
world usury and EUGENICS borg
------------------'U.N.'---------------------.
THIS IS NOT A JOKE.