Internationally, conservation easements are increasingly popular land management tools for private landowners, government agencies and non-governmental organizations seeking to preserve forests and other natural settings. This paper reports a study of the design and use of conservation easements by organizations and public agencies in the USA. More than 355 conservation organizations and 16 state agencies holding at least 3,598 forestland easements were identified. Demonstrated shortfalls in baseline forest inventories, record keeping, and professionally-developed management plans were evident on working forest easements. Failure to address these shortcomings runs the risk of jeopardizing the legitimacy of the easement approach even where favorable legal and tax conditions exist. Management restrictions varied broadly, with a minority of respondents prohibiting such techniques as clearcutting and salvage logging. Concerns for the use of chemicals, best management practices, and streamside management zones were commonly reflected in easement language, whereas logging road design and the cultivation of old-growth conditions remain largely undeveloped. Implications from the US experience, where easements are relatively well-developed, highlights the need for professional forestry advice-particularly for non-industrial or small-scale forest owners-in both easement development and implementation, the need for careful planning, and the need to carefully consider the respective goals of the forest landowners in crafting the easement documents. In the cases of developing nations, consideration of the differing needs of landowners may require increased flexibility in management documents.
Exempt domestic water well provisions exist in sixteen states and allow landowners to use water wells producing relatively small amounts of water or water wells used for domestic or other specific purposes to avoid certain regulatory requirements. Exempt wells provisions apply mainly in the west, where most states use the prior appropriation rule (“first in time, first in right”) for ground water rights. Critics voice concerns over implications ranging from land use planning to water supply. This article explores existing state regulation and finds that the term “exempt well” is a misnomer. The vast majority of states impose numerous restrictions on exempt wells. Existing regulations include limitations on the quantity, location, and amount of irrigation use. Other provisions address construction standards, required filing of information and other practices. The review of regulations suggests that many steps to mitigate the impact of exempt wells are already in place.
It will be extremely difficult to commit the sin of choosing too much open space in getting started (or at almost any other time, for that matter), and any planner who can't think now of some land worth saving ought to get into another line of work." 1 I
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.