Expanding Family Forest Owner Options to Keep Their Land in Forest Use

Family forest owners (FFOs) own the majority of US forests and 47% of forests in the Northeast. Over 90% of northeastern FFOs want their land to stay wooded. Maintaining forest-based ecosystem services necessitates finding ways to help FFOs achieve goals for keeping their land undeveloped. Conservation easements (CEs) prohibit residential and commercial development, typically in perpetuity, but are currently underused. Understanding what drives CE interest may help maximize their potential as a conservation tool. We explored northeastern FFOs’ likelihood of CE adoption through contingent behavior responses to permanent and temporary CE scenarios. For each commitment length, we tested a range of financial compensation amounts and FFO characteristics. Increased financial compensation did not increase CE adoption likelihood for either commitment length, whereas attitudinal variables strongly influenced intention for both. Respondents did not appear to prefer temporary to permanent easements but were equally likely to consider adoption, suggesting that providing both tools may be in order. Providing FFOs with more options to keep their land in forest use, especially when there is currently high interest in this goal but low participation, has the potential to attract new and different segments of FFOs, thereby sustaining the essential ecosystem services derived from forests. Study Implications Family forest owner interest in land protection in the northeastern US is high; over 90% owning four or more ha have indicated they want their land to stay wooded. Few, however, have taken advantage of conservation easements (CEs) to protect their land. Highly effective at ensuring the continual provision of forest benefits, CEs prohibit land uses such as residential and commercial development. Although research acknowledges CE interest, little is known about what characteristics of the tool are desirable. Gaining greater understanding of these characteristics can help expand the options FFOs have to achieve their goal of keeping their land in forest use.

Conserving what? Conservation easements and environmental justice in the coastal US South

Conservation easements, voluntary legal agreements whereby a landowner forfeits some of his or her land development rights in exchange for tax benefits, are an increasingly common strategy for protecting land from development in the United States today. For instance, from 2005 to 2015, private land under conservation easement in the United States increased by 175%, growing to more than 16 million acres held by land trusts, which are collectively endowed with more than $2.2 billion in funding. Recent critical analyses of this trend conceptualize conservation easements as a tool of neoliberal environmental governance, whereby nature is increasingly individuated and conservation is (at least partially) privatized. Conservation easements grew rapidly in the 1980s as the result of a compromise between mainstream environmental organizations and the Reagan administration’s anti-public lands agenda; thus, one interpretation is that they are the pragmatic “roll-out” of conservation efforts from a handcuffed liberal environmental movement. Yet, our historical and qualitative analysis of the politics of conservation easements in the coastal US South suggests that they were actually an elite white class project from the start, rather than a reaction to constraints on public lands protection. Thus, we argue that the environmental justice implications of conservation easements deserve more attention. Our efforts to develop a spatial-statistical assessment of the ways that their ecological benefits are distributed beyond parcel boundaries were limited by the privatization of data on conservation easements. Instead, we assess the distribution of easements themselves across the region, finding limited differences, but ones that we interpret as meaningful, between public and private conservation lands regarding racial composition and incomes of nearby populations. Importantly, this kind of mixed-methods analysis indicates how the exclusive control of data undergirds the exclusive control of land. Most broadly, we argue that Cheryl Harris’s theorization of “whiteness as property” remains an important resource for political ecologists because it helps specify the relationship between race, class, and nature under capitalism.

Towards a Characterization of Working Forest Conservation Easements in Georgia, USA

We examine the attributes of working forest conservation easements in Georgia. Easement contracts and baseline reports are inspected to investigate easement themes, land use types, recreation opportunities, hydrological features, and forest management activity. Easement themes are heavily weighted towards themes of protecting natural habitat and preserving the conservation values of properties. Predominant land use types include wildlife food plots, bottomland hardwoods, and planted pine stands. Common hydrological features found were small creeks/streams and ponds. Lastly, forest management was characterized as having small amounts of restrictions present, with forest management being largely similar to other unencumbered property in the southeastern USA. This information can be used as a reference for landowners interested in establishing a working forest conservation easement (WFCE) on their property as well as a tool for comparison for researchers investigating easement characteristics in other regions.