Conservation Easements

[L Roebuck]

I wanted to open a discussion mainly to see if anyone has experience with the Conservation Easements. Second to discuss Cave Property and these type contracts.

Why? It has been brought to my attention that some private landowner's are losing their land through Conservation Easements offered by nonprofit-environmental-friendly land trusts, nonprofit nature conservancy’s, NGO environmental organizations, or government agencies unless the easement has been worded to protect the landowner’s rights.

[chac]

This could be a great topic. I am more familiar with non-profit conservancy and environmental agency activities in Mexico, as opposed to the TAG or USA area. There are lots of pros and cons in these conservancy organization's activities in Mexico. We must accept the fact that local NGO's and Biosphere support groups are short of funds, as much as we would like to see them be self-sufficient and potent organizations. No excuses offered.

It is not uncommon for foreign conservancies to provide a mountain of cash to secure neighboring properties to a Biosphere, or initiate viable studies within a designated Biosphere. Permission to use the Biosphere is usually obtained from the controlling NGO in Mexico at this date. One conservancy group has been particularly active in Mexico over the past 8 years.

These conservancy groups have provided generous funds to local NGO's in Mexico, to include at least one cave exploration group. Their contribution was provided to aid a study within an area of caves and collection of sensitive environments

Where do you think this will lead in TAG Lynn? Landowners should not have to lose when they get in bed with conservancies.

Jim

[L Roebuck]

Feb 10, 2011 18:39:22 GMT -5 chac said:

This could be a great topic. I am more familiar with non-profit conservancy and environmental agency activities in Mexico, as opposed to the TAG or USA area. There are lots of pros and cons in these conservancy organization's activities in Mexico. We must accept the fact that local NGO's and Biosphere support groups are short of funds, as much as we would like to see them be self-sufficient and potent organizations. No excuses offered.

It is not uncommon for foreign conservancies to provide a mountain of cash to secure neighboring properties to a Biosphere, or initiate viable studies within a designated Biosphere. Permission to use the Biosphere is usually obtained from the controlling NGO in Mexico at this date. One conservancy group has been particularly active in Mexico over the past 8 years.

These conservancy groups have provided generous funds to local NGO's in Mexico, to include at least one cave exploration group. Their contribution was provided to aid a study within an area of caves and collection of sensitive environments

Where do you think this will lead in TAG Lynn? Landowners should not have to lose when they get in bed with conservancies.

Jim

It appears to be leading to the swindling of property owners, Jim.

In TAG I do know a couple of private cave landowner's have been ‘hoodwinked’ to by a conservancy concerning a Conservation Easement. From what I have seen lately in TAG these nature conservancy's are not taking land from big development corporations, they are taking it from private landowners who have work hard for their land and planned for their land to go the their beneficiaries. By ‘beneficiaries’ I mean the people actually related to the private property owner (cave owner) through bloodlines and NOT a nature conservancy, government or even the opportunistic carpetbagger.

Private property owner’s should understand that a conservation easement is a legal document. By granting a conservation easement they are not only restricting the future use of the property, they are actually conveying an interest in the property
to the government agency, and/or non-profit organization such as a nature conservancy.

So basically, IF a person comes to you and wants ‘right’ to your property and a ‘contract’ signed – property owners should take that contract straight to a qualified Attorney--so he can review the 'legal jargon' of the Conservation Easement BEFORE ever even considering it.

IMO Never give away your mineral rights and Never sign away any rights to your property.

The Tennessee Laws.

2010 Tennessee Code
Title 66 - Property
Chapter 9 - Easements and Restrictive Covenants
Part 3 - Conservation Easement Act of 1981
law.justia.com/tennessee/codes/2010/title-66/chapter-9/part-3/

[chac]

I have a feeling that we are speaking of the same conservation agency. In Mexico, when this particular conservancy goes to work in Biosphere Reserves, the controlling Mexican NGO holds trump as to dedication and use of donated conservancy funds. The conservancy has lobbying power though, as to whether or not to make unlimited funds available to the Biosphere and managing NGO. So projects can be, or may not be funded depending on the whether the conditions for the donated money are accepted. This becomes a further convoluted mess as the managing NGO's are often unstable entities due to personnel changes.

A new development for Mexico is for the conservation entity to purchase properties outside the original Biosphere - on the borders of the Biosphere. This is a pretty slick trick as they can donate those properties to the original Biosphere, then dictate their own terms as to use or access to this "new donated" section of the Biosphere. As for how conservancies purchase this new land, that's another huge discussion. This sort of "purchasing" practice surrounding the remote Biospheres of Mexico starts to sound similar to what is going on in TN.

If landowners in TN or in other USA states provided legal or contractual access to their properties by a conservation organization without the advice of a lawyer, then I am not surprised with the final outcome. My apologies if this sounds callous, that is not my intention.

My suggestion is to gather the group of landowners that are offended by this situation and have them hire a representative. The next move might include thoughtful press releases and press interviews airing the complaints. These could be published in local and state newspapers. I suppose the next step could be a meeting with the state representative and senators. Is the conservation entity registered in TN, and is the organization declared as a non-profit?

You do give fair warning and advice in your post. It would be nice to see these sorts of errant behavior limited by reasonable contractual restraints. It's also a good practice to be a responsible and cautious landowner.

Having a possible stigma attached to responsible and caring cavers by less than honest conservation groups is not a bright horizon to look towards. Money and power, some organizations are charlatans.

Thanks Lynn!

[Brian Roebuck]

I'm sure it is all in the way these contracts are written. Conservation Easements may have a standard format but I am certain they are customized for each piece of land depending on what the goals of the conservation group involved. Land owners big or small are not always aware of what the legal language in these easements means. They sound innocent enough but have the potential to do great harm to the land owner. He or she may even lose the very land they chose to protect and preserve. For example when they talk about beneficiaries it seems all parties mentioned on the easement become beneficiaries. They are usually sure to mention themselves as well as other government agencies in the document.

Bottom line is be very careful in setting these up and get the help of a really experienced lawyer before you sign! Once signed it is forever.

[L Roebuck]

Feb 14, 2011 6:56:50 GMT -5 Brian Roebuck said:

Bottom line is be very careful in setting these up and get the help of a really experienced lawyer before you sign! Once signed it is forever.

And don't forget the high legal expenses if you find the need to take the conservation easement issue to court.

[L Roebuck]

Feb 13, 2011 19:25:51 GMT -5 chac said:

I have a feeling that we are speaking of the same conservation agency. In Mexico, when this particular conservancy goes to work in Biosphere Reserves, the controlling Mexican NGO holds trump as to dedication and use of donated conservancy funds. The conservancy has lobbying power though, as to whether or not to make unlimited funds available to the Biosphere and managing NGO. So projects can be, or may not be funded depending on the whether the conditions for the donated money are accepted. This becomes a further convoluted mess as the managing NGO's are often unstable entities due to personnel changes.

A new development for Mexico is for the conservation entity to purchase properties outside the original Biosphere - on the borders of the Biosphere. This is a pretty slick trick as they can donate those properties to the original Biosphere, then dictate their own terms as to use or access to this "new donated" section of the Biosphere. As for how conservancies purchase this new land, that's another huge discussion. This sort of "purchasing" practice surrounding the remote Biospheres of Mexico starts to sound similar to what is going on in TN.

If landowners in TN or in other USA states provided legal or contractual access to their properties by a conservation organization without the advice of a lawyer, then I am not surprised with the final outcome. My apologies if this sounds callous, that is not my intention.

My suggestion is to gather the group of landowners that are offended by this situation and have them hire a representative. The next move might include thoughtful press releases and press interviews airing the complaints. These could be published in local and state newspapers. I suppose the next step could be a meeting with the state representative and senators. Is the conservation entity registered in TN, and is the organization declared as a non-profit?

You do give fair warning and advice in your post. It would be nice to see these sorts of errant behavior limited by reasonable contractual restraints. It's also a good practice to be a responsible and cautious landowner.

Having a possible stigma attached to responsible and caring cavers by less than honest conservation groups is not a bright horizon to look towards. Money and power, some organizations are charlatans.

Yes the "purchasing practice' of the Biospheres of Mexico does sound similar to what is currently going on in Tennessee. It also sounds similar to the current practice in Canada.

It is very misleading for any nature organization to imply to a landowner that the land will be protected or preserved when they have no intention to do either. Let's face it the organizations grab the land for 'resale' as soon as possible to a state, local or government agency. After all land has become a commodity to them, to be bought and sold. In reality, if 'conservation easements' were such a wonderful 'conservation tool' then why is it that the various conservancy employees and/or government employees have not signed over the rights to their personally-owned property?

And yes I agree the "how" the conservancies purchase the land is a discussion all by itself. Does it seem nature organizations have now become a new age political party?