Search

Government is involved in all conservation easement transactions--whether as authorizer, funder, or holder. These governmental roles often work in concert, but not always; there is potential for conflict between various entities involved in securing lands for long-term conservation outcomes. This Article explores these tensions and considers how understanding the various roles that government may play can help inform conservation practice and assist in the design of conservation easements that best leverage governmental involvement. To this end, Part I provides a general overview of conservation easements with a focus on working lands conservation easements. Part II examines the six specific roles that government can play with regard to conservation easements. Part III explores the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP) and the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP). Part III also explores the various stakeholders involved in working lands protection, how their priorities help to shape the legislative design of the ACEP and RCPP, and how these programs operate on the ground with an eye to the upcoming 2023/24 Farm Bill. Last, Part IV provides recommendations on how segmenting the government's various roles can help to mitigate conflict and evaluate how and what functions (and at what level) government should undertake versus private land trusts. As conservation easements continue to play an increasingly important role in land conservation efforts nationally, understanding the varied roles that government plays in these transactions can determine how this involvement should be structured to maximize the conservation benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines opportunities for reform and reimagining in conservation easement and land use law in the U.S., with the objective of sustaining and securing perpetual land conservation. Topics discussed include the passage of the Charitable Conservation Easement Program Integrity Act to end abuse of the conservation easement incentive, and the need to address the power imbalance between the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, landowners and land trusts.

The article focuses on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third circuit in the case In re PennEast Pipeline Co. which swung the balance of power over control of natural gas pipeline construction back in the direction of the states. It mentions decision has injected significant legal heft to conservation easements and handed new leverage to any state interested in opposing a natural gas pipeline. It also mentions natural gas pipeline could make to their conservation easement laws.

The article provides an overview of easement law implied from a preexisting use. Topics mentioned include the definitive treatise on easements, an explanation of the statute of frauds, a description of court cases involving implied easements requiring absolute necessity, and the meaning of reasonably necessary standard.

The article focuses on the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, which includes the SECURE Act 2.0, aimed at enhancing retirement savings and conservation easements in the U.S. Topics include the change in expansion of automatic enrollment in retirement plans, the introduction of new starter 401(k) plans, and an increase in age for mandatory required minimum distributions. It also mentions that the appropriations act limits charitable deductions for partners of pass-through entities.

The article discusses the recommendations regarding federal tax law as it relates to conservation easements provided by the Conservation Easement Task Force which was convened by the American Bar Association's Real Property, Trust and Estate Law (RPTE) section. Topics covered include a background necessary to understand the recommendations, the Task Force's comments on Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 and the provisions that would be common to most conservation easements.

Farmland preservation has become an important pursuit for those seeking to protect the working landscape. One of the most common approaches for securing this protection is through the targeted use of agricultural conservation easements, typically perpetual land use agreements designed to limit incompatible activities in order to preserve future agricultural viability. Since the 1990s, agricultural conservation easements have protected millions of acres of land, and many of these donations have relied on the federal tax incentives provided by section 170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code to facilitate these transactions. Perhaps surprisingly given this high rate of utilization, securing farmland for future productive use is not an express objective of the Internal Revenue Code, which requires these donations to qualify on other grounds. This Article explores the impacts of this disconnect and examines options for how farmland preservation objectives could be better integrated into the current taxincentivized conservation easement framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate change has significant consequences for land conservation. Government agencies and nonprofit land trusts heavily rely on perpetual conservation easements. However, climate change and other dynamic landscape changes raise questions about the effectiveness and adaptability of permanent conservation instruments like conservation easements. Building upon a study of 269 conservation easements and interviews with seventy conservation-easement professionals in six different states, we examine the adaptability of conservation easements to climate change. We outline four potential approaches to enhance conservation outcomes under climate change: (1) shift land-acquisition priorities to account for potential climate change impacts; (2) consider conservation tools other than perpetual conservation easements; (3) ensure that the terms of conservation easements permit the holder to adapt to climate change successfully; and (4) provide for more active stewardship of conservation lands. There is still a good deal of uncertainty as to the legal fate of a conservation easement that no longer meets its original purposes. Many state laws provide that conservation easements can be modified or terminated in the same manner as traditional easements. Yet conservation easements are in many ways unlike other easements. The beneficiary is usually the public, not merely a neighboring landowner, and the holder is always a nonprofit conservation organization or a government agency. Thus, there is a case to be made for adaptive protection. An overly narrow focus on perpetual property rights could actually thwart efforts to meet adaptation needs over the long term. We call for careful attention to ensuring conservation outcomes in dynamic landscapes over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study we investigate shallow turbidity density currents and underflows from mechanical point of view. We propose a simple hyperbolic model for such flows. On one hand, our model is based on very basic conservation principles. On the other hand, the turbulent nature of the flow is also taken into account through the energy dissipation mechanism. Moreover, the mixing with the pure water along with sediments entrainment and deposition processes are considered, which makes the problem dynamically interesting. One of the main advantages of our model is that it requires the specification of only two modeling parameters — the rate of turbulent dissipation and the rate of the pure water entrainment. Consequently, the resulting model turns out to be very simple and self-consistent. This model is validated against several experimental data and several special classes of solutions (such as travelling, self-similar and steady) are constructed. Unsteady simulations show that some special solutions are realized as asymptotic long time states of dynamic trajectories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the potential impact that an amendment to Vermont's conservation easement statute could have on the future of long distance hiking trails such as Vermont's Long Trail as of 2015, and it mentions land conservation efforts, state laws, and an assessment of Maine's conservation easement law. The legal rights of private landowners are examined, along with legislative bills and the tension between the Vermont Land Trust and the Upper Valley Land Trust.

The article focuses on the rules for the enforcement of the conservation easements. Topics discussed include availability of the legal and practical issues for third party violators, laws for the enforcement of the conservation easement drafting and management of the third party violations. It also discusses various clauses defining the least responsibilities of the landowners.

The article discusses American property law and an anticommons alternative to perpetual conservation easements as of November 2013, focusing on the legal rights of landowners, state laws, and land conservation efforts in the U.S. According to the article, perpetual restrictions on land may lead to inefficient long-run allocations. It states that an example of an anticommons is a wilderness preserve that any person has standing to enforce. Economic efficiency is also examined.

The article focuses on the restructuring of the tax-preferred easement process in the U.S. in order to maximize conservation value. Topics include the how governments incentivize conservation, the development of private land in the U.S. in 2013, and the creation of nonprofit land trusts. Information is provided on conservation tax deductions.

Farmland or working-land conservation easements serve two purposes. One is charitable, to protect open space from development; the other is practical, to preserve the land in productive agricultural use. These purposes, however, create a tension in the easement itself that can force the land trust that holds the easement to choose between the two purposes when the easement, meant in part to protect the farm, threatens the farm's continued viability. Neutral-impact amendments are amendments to working-land easements that allow farmers to improve farm production or viability without harming the conservation value of the easements. Such amendments seem beneficial: a land trust can advance one of its goals of keeping agricultural land productive--without sacrificing the other goal of preserving the conservation value of the land. By approving such an amendment, however, a land trust likely violates the private benefit doctrine and risks losing its tax-exempt status. This Note argues that the IRS should explicitly decide not to apply the private benefit doctrine to neutral-impact amendments of farmland and working-land conservation easements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the violation of conservation easements, private property rights of a landowner to achieve conservation purposes, under the threat of condemnation practice in context to the infrastructure development in California. It presents the information on Chapter 589, the law, that provides easement holders a notice period of condemnation of no less than 105 days prior to the proceedings and a right to just compensation by the condemnor may be a nonprofit organizations or government agency. It highlights that before the Conservation Easement Act of 1979 selling or donating conservation easements was an expensive and cumbrous process however the law enactment provided, the right to restrict the development and use of the property for landowners.

The article presents information on conservation easements in land which restricts the ability of landowners in using their land in permissible way for yielding benefits. The eminent domain proceedings and the enforceability of exacted conservation easements in California are discussed. It mentions the related legislative history, statutes and case law. It also offers suggestions for improving exaction of conservation easements.

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses various reports within the issue on topics including reforms in conservation easement law in Maine, its implications for local land use planning and zoning, and changes in federal and state tax incentives.

The article focuses on various issues related to zoning for conservation easements in the U.S. It explores the Uniform Conservation Easement Act (UCEA) and the concept of land-use planning in the country. It examines various zoning ordinances and restrictive covenants that represent public control of land use. It highlights the impact of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.) and regulations in the use of conservation easements. Moreover, the advantages of linking conservation easements to local zoning ordinances are offered.

The article focuses on the legal issues involving conservation easements and the real-property-law doctrine of merger. It discusses the prevention of conservation easements from being extinguished under the doctrine of merger, which would ensure that the provisions protecting the public interest and investments are found in the state enabling statutes and federal tax laws. It says that the misapplication of the doctrine of merger to conservation easement may cause significant negative public policy ramifications. It mentions that conservation easements are authorized under state law as the provide conservation or historic benefits to the public and are not private contracts between two parties.

The article focuses on the first and the only comprehensive conservation easement reform law in the U.S. that was enacted in Maine, which covers more land under conservation easement as compared to any other U.S. state. It mentions several requirements for every conservation easement in the state under the reform law including easement monitoring, public registration, and the safeguard of easements against tax foreclosure. It says that the reform has gained strong and broad support from the state's conservation easement leaders since its enactment in 2007. It suggests that the country should also enact such type of reform law.

The article offers an overview on the framework of major policy and legal issues that informs a country over the adoption of private conservation restrictions. Noted is that conservation restrictions should be a two-way street rather than just the export of the American methods of conservation easement. Also suggested is that the process should be free from legal and conservation jargon and without predisposition for legal structures, values, and policy choices in the U.S.