Abstract
Conservation organizations rely on conservation easements for diverse purposes, including protection of species and natural communities, working forests, and open space. This research investigated how perpetual conservation easements incorporated property rights, responsibilities, and options for change over time in land management. We compared 34 conservation easements held by one federal, three state, and four nonprofit organizations in Wisconsin. They incorporated six mechanisms for ongoing land management decision-making: management plans (74 %), modifications to permitted landowner uses with discretionary consent (65 %), amendment clauses (53 %), easement holder rights to conduct land management (50 %), reference to laws or policies as compliance terms (47 %), and conditional use permits (12 %). Easements with purposes to protect species and natural communities had more ecological monitoring rights, organizational control over land management, and mechanisms for change than easements with general open space purposes. Forestry purposes were associated with mechanisms for change but not necessarily with ecological monitoring rights or organizational control over land management. The Natural Resources Conservation Service-Wetland Reserve Program had a particularly consistent approach with high control over land use and some discretion to modify uses through permits. Conservation staff perceived a need to respond to changing social and ecological conditions but were divided on whether climate change was likely to negatively impact their conservation easements. Many conservation easements involved significant constraints on easement holders’ options for altering land management to achieve conservation purposes over time. This study suggests the need for greater attention to easement drafting, monitoring, and ongoing decision processes to ensure the public benefits of land conservation in changing landscapes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bruch C (2009) Adaptive water management: strengthening laws and institutions to cope with uncertainty. In: Biswas AK, Tortajada C, Izquierdo R (eds) Water management in 2020 and beyond. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 89–113
Cheever F (1996) Public good and private magic in the law of land trusts and conservation easements: a happy present and a troubled future. Denver Univ Law Rev 73:1077–1102
Chiras DD, Reganold JP (2009) Natural resource conservation: management for a sustainable future, vol 10. Addison Wesley, Boston
Fairfax SK, Gwin L, King MA, Raymond L, Watt LA (2005) Buying nature: the limits of land acquisition as a conservation strategy, 1780–2004. The MIT Press, Cambridge
Farrier D (1995) Conserving biodiversity on private land: incentives for management or compensation for lost expectations? Harv Environ Law 19:303–408
Greene DM (2004) Dynamic conservation easements: facing the problem of perpetuity in land conservation. Seattle Univ Law Rev 28:883–923
Gustanski JA, Squires RH (2000) Protecting the land: conservation easements past, present, and future. Island Press, Washington, DC
Haney A, Power RL (1996) Adaptive management for sound ecosystem management. Environ Manag 20(6):879–886
Hannah L, Midgley GF, Lovejoy T, Bond WJ, Bush M, Lovett JC, Scott D, Woodward FI (2002) Conservation of biodiversity in a changing climate. Conserv Biol 16(1):264–268
Holling CS (1978) Adaptive environmental assessment and management. Wiley, New York
Hughes L (2000) Biological consequences of global warming: is the signal already apparent? Trends Ecol Evol 15:56–61
Jay JE (2012) When perpetual is not forever: the challenge of changing conditions, amendment, and termination of perpetual conservation easements. Harv Environ Law 36:1–78
Knoot TG, Schulte LA, Rickenbach M (2010) Oak conservation and restoration on private forestlands: negotiating a complex social-ecological landscape. Environ Manag 45:155–164
Korngold G (2007) Solving the contentious issues of private conservation easements: promoting flexibility for the future and engaging the public land use process. Utah Law Rev 4:1039–1084
Lee KN, Lawrence J (1986) Adaptive management: learning from the Columbia River basin fish and wildlife program. Environ Law 16:431–460
Lindenmayer DB, Franklin JF, Fischer J (2006) General management principles and a checklist of strategies to guide forest biodiversity conservation. Biol Conserv 131(3):433–445
LTA (Land Trust Alliance) (2010) 2010 Land Trust Alliance Census. Land Trust Alliance, Washington, DC. http://www.landtrustalliance.org/land-trusts/land-trust-census. Accessed 14 Jan 2012
Mahoney JD (2002) Perpetual restrictions on land and the problem of the future. Va Law Rev 88:739–787
McLain RJ, Lee RG (1996) Adaptive management: promises and pitfalls. Environ Manag 20(4):437–448
McLaughlin NA (2004) Increasing the tax incentives for conservation easement donations—a responsible approach. Ecol Law Q 31(1):1–115
McLaughlin NA (2005) Rethinking the perpetual nature of conservation easements. Harv Environ Law 29:421–521
McLaughlin NA (2006) Amending perpetual conservation easements: a case study of the Myrtle Grove controversy. Univ Richmond Law Rev 40:1072–1075
Merenlender AM, Huntsinger L, Guthey G, Fairfax SK (2004) Land trusts and conservation easements: who is conserving what for whom? Conserv Biol 18:65–75
Moore SA, Wallington TJ, Hobbs RJ, Ehrlich PR, Holling CS, Levin S, Lindenmayer D, Pahl-Wostl C, Possingham H, Turner MG, Westoby M (2009) Diversity in current ecological thinking: implications for environmental management. Environ Manag 43:17–27
Olsson P, Folke C, Berkes F (2004) Adaptive co-management for building resilience in social-ecological systems. Environ Manag 34(1):75–90
Owley J (2010) Use of conservation easements by local governments. In: Salkin P, Hirokawa K (eds) Greening local governments. A.B.A. Publishing, Chicago
Owley J (2011) Conservation easements at the climate change crossroads. Law Contemp Probl 74:199–228
Parker DP (2004) Land trusts and the choice to conserve land with conservation easements or full ownership. Nat Area J 44:483–518
Parry ML, Canziani OF, Palutikof JP, van der Linden PJ, Hanson CE (eds) Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Richardson JJ (2010) Conservation easements and adaptive management. Sea Grant Law Policy J 3(1):31–58
Rissman AR (2010) Designing perpetual conservation agreements for land management. Rangel Ecol Manag 63:167–175
Rissman AR, Comendant T, Lozier L, Kareiva P, Kiesecker JM, Shaw R, Merenlender AM (2007a) Conservation easements: private use and biodiversity protection. Conserv Biol 21(3):709–718
Rissman AR, Reiner R, Merenlender AM (2007b) Monitoring natural resources on rangeland conservation easements. Rangelands 29:21–26
Salafsky N, Margoluis R, Redford K (2001) Adaptive management: a tool for conservation practitioners. Biodiversity Support Program, Washington, DC
Serkin C (2010) Entrenching environmentalism: private conservation easements over public land. Univ Chic Law Rev 77(1):341–366
Smithers J, Smit B (1997) Human adaptation to climatic variability and change. Glob Environ Change 7(2):129–146
Stankey GH, Clark RN, Bormann BT (eds) (2006) Learning to manage a complex ecosystem: adaptive management and the Northwest Forest Plan. US Forest Service PNW-RP-567, Portland
Tompkins EL, Adger WN (2004) Does adaptive management of natural resources enhance resilience to climate change? Ecol Soc 9(2):10
West JM, Julius SH, Kareiva P, Enquist C, Lawler JJ, Petersen B, Johnson AE, Shaw MR (2009) US natural resources and climate change: concepts and approaches for management adaptation. Environ Manag 44(6):1001–1021
Acknowledgments
Many thanks to the government and land trust staff who participated in this research. We thank the faculty from the Climate Change and Conservation Easements distributed graduate seminar, including Cinnamon Carlarne, Fred Cheever, Josh Eagle, Rob Fischman, Jessica Owley, Buzz Thompson, and Bill Weeks. Additional assistance in developing the Wisconsin cases was provided by graduate students Andrea Bachrach, Megan Pulver, and Marie Russo. Funding was generously provided by the Resources Legacy Fund and the University of Wisconsin-Madison. The research complies with the current laws of the United States.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Adena Rissman and Menka Bihari are joint first authors.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rissman, A., Bihari, M., Hamilton, C. et al. Land Management Restrictions and Options for Change in Perpetual Conservation Easements. Environmental Management 52, 277–288 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-013-0091-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-013-0091-z