No description available.

Conservation in the nonprofit land trust community is primarily through fee-simple ownership or conservation easement with the management plan becoming more common. Data were obtained from the 2005 Land Trust Alliance National Land Trust Survey. Of 1,667 land trusts, 972 reported at least one fee-owned, and 946 reported at least one conservation easement property. The overall guiding hypothesis was that demographic variables affect the probability of having a management plan in place. Demographic variables included: 1) number of employees, 2) age of organizations, 3) size of protected areas, and 4) geographic region. In logistic regression for fee-owned properties, full-time employees increased the probability of having management plans, whereas, part-time employees decreased the probability, p=0.001 and p=0.004. For conservation easements, region was of significance. In general, logistic regression and Chi-square analysis indicated that land trusts with one or more employees have greater ability to carry out their conservation mission and that regions of the U.S. vary in likelihood of having management plans / Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Management

As the community land trust (CLT) movement in the United States approaches its 50th anniversary, CLT members, practitioners and researchers are exploring and pushing the boundaries of the model. CLTs offer an alternative model of land use tenure that permanently removes properties from the speculative market for the ongoing common good of the community. Most frequently associated with the provision of affordable housing in strong real estate markets, several CLTs across the country are now expanding into the commercial realm. This thesis compares the incipient commercial development efforts underway in St. Paul, Minnesota and New Orleans, Louisiana in order to better understand the potential role of CLTs in helping communities preserve and create commercial assets under a wide range of market forces.

Public and private actors have suggested using the community land trust (CLT) model as a remedy for a number of housing related issues. This is based primarily upon the documented successes of CLT homeownership programs. Some caution that the growth of CLTs and the increased use of the CLT model beyond homeownership may stretch organizations beyond their capacity or force them to consider how to provide stewardship and community control. The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) has been used by a handful of CLTs and there are reasons to believe that more CLTs may utilize it in the future. This thesis explores the opportunities and challenges that using LIHTC may present for CLTs through case studies with two different types of organizations--a grassroots CLT in Athens, GA and a nonprofit housing developer with a CLT program in Park City, UT--that have used it as a funding source.

Thesis (M.C.P.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Urban Studies and Planning, 1981. / MICROFICHE COPY AVAILABLE IN ARCHIVES AND ROTCH. / Includes bibliographical references. / by Thelma E. Pittman Etheridge. / M.C.P.

This study examines the extent to which volunteer-run local land trusts in Ontario are governed in a manner that will allow them to protect valued ecosystems effectively in perpetuity. It also identifies needs and opportunities for building the capacities of land trusts as long term stewardship organizations. The primary academic contribution of this research is the identification of criteria for evaluating land trust governance and their ability to meet their conservation aims. The criteria are applied in a case study of the Niagara Land Trust, a local land trust in the process of incorporating. Specific recommendations are made to assist this organization to improve its operations. The principal findings of this research are that some local land trusts have attained a level of governance which will allow them to protect land in perpetuity, but some land trusts have not. The failure of some land trusts could result in donors and government questioning the movement as a whole. Generally, the main gaps in capacity centre on weaknesses in financial sustainability, training/managing of volunteers, record-keeping, baseline inventories and continued monitoring, and the problem of requiring people to have specific professional skills in largely volunteer organizations. The thesis concludes by offering specific suggestions to the Niagara Land Trust, the Ontario Land Trust Alliance and the Canadian Land Trust Alliance. Local land trusts have provided many communities with an attractive option for conserving land; strengthening the movement will ensure that this grassroots work can continue.

This study examines the extent to which volunteer-run local land trusts in Ontario are governed in a manner that will allow them to protect valued ecosystems effectively in perpetuity. It also identifies needs and opportunities for building the capacities of land trusts as long term stewardship organizations. The primary academic contribution of this research is the identification of criteria for evaluating land trust governance and their ability to meet their conservation aims. The criteria are applied in a case study of the Niagara Land Trust, a local land trust in the process of incorporating. Specific recommendations are made to assist this organization to improve its operations. The principal findings of this research are that some local land trusts have attained a level of governance which will allow them to protect land in perpetuity, but some land trusts have not. The failure of some land trusts could result in donors and government questioning the movement as a whole. Generally, the main gaps in capacity centre on weaknesses in financial sustainability, training/managing of volunteers, record-keeping, baseline inventories and continued monitoring, and the problem of requiring people to have specific professional skills in largely volunteer organizations. The thesis concludes by offering specific suggestions to the Niagara Land Trust, the Ontario Land Trust Alliance and the Canadian Land Trust Alliance. Local land trusts have provided many communities with an attractive option for conserving land; strengthening the movement will ensure that this grassroots work can continue.

Conservation strategies frequently require prioritization of targets due to limited budgets and personnel. Prioritization involves choosing those areas that return the most conservation value for the time and money invested. Hence, the process of prioritization involves evaluating multiple conservation values and the uneven spatial distribution of those values across a landscape of concern. The goal of this study was to help conservation organizations improve decision making for implementation of prioritization-based strategies for land protection using a GIS-based, multi-criteria decision support system (GIS-MCDS). Geographic Information Systems (GIS) can assist conservation planners in quantifying the relative desirability of one area over another, therefore enabling better business and ecological decisions. GIS analyses for planning are routinely undertaken over large geographic extents such as ecoregions to identify priority areas. These analyses often summarize priority by pixel values in a raster image. Implementation of conservation strategy often takes place at the much larger parcel level. Therefore, aggregating pixel-based results by parcels is a prerequisite to implementation of a purchase or easement strategy. I developed a spatial decision support system in an attempt to quantify private land holdings in the High Knob area of Virginia for their relative conservation value, as defined by the Clinch Valley Program of The Nature Conservancy. It utilizes a proxy approach for measuring conservation values and an analytical hierarchy process to aggregate the results by privately held real estate parcels. Simple prioritizations are often based on parcel size alone, rather than consideration of the many conservation values that characterize land parcels. Though it is much quicker and easier to prioritize parcels in this manner, such simplicity risks missing important smaller areas for conservation while prioritizing larger parcels with less value. I compared this simple "bigger is better" ranking method to the GIS-based multi-criteria method developed for TNC. There was a 0.57 correlation between the ranked lists produced by the two models, suggesting that parcel size alone does partially explain the complexity modeled by the multi-criteria method. However, the more complex method did produce different top priority parcels, which could significantly change an organization's implementation strategy. I conclude that both methods have their applications, though the multi-criteria method is better for long-term implementations of strategic acquisition and easement. A secondary goal was to identify to what extent land trust organizations are prepared to implement a multi-criteria type analysis like the one considered in this study. I conducted an online survey of conservation professionals on how their organization currently uses GIS and their satisfaction with GIS analyses to meet their organizational mission. Sixty-one responses were collected and analyzed. The overwhelming majority of conservation organizations recognize the benefits that GIS bring and have already developed some level of internal expertise, though many barriers to using GIS were also identified. From these results, I conclude that most land trust conservation organizations are not currently utilizing the insights that multi-criteria GIS prioritization is capable of offering, but that their previous positive experience with GIS makes such analyses an attractive proposition for those on the cutting edge of the land conservation movement. / Master of Science

This research examines the perceptions and attitudes of residents in five rural communities located in the Hilltowns of Western Massachusetts: Ashfield, Chesterfield, Conway, Goshen, and Williamsburg. The research aims to explore the divide between local residents’ strongly held support for private property rights and a concomitant desire to maintain the qualities that contribute to the social, ecological, and aesthetic experience of a rural town, including a viable farm and forest economy. Previous research in the same project utilized mailed, written surveys. In this case, in-depth, in-person interviews were conducted with ten residents of the study area in order to complement the breadth of information gleaned from these earlier studies. The research goal was to inform planning efforts that strive to balance the preservation of rural character with growth and change. Questions were asked to ascertain the individual’s connection to the rural community, including length of residency, occupation, and other demographic variables. Further questions were posed to learn how participants felt that landowner rights to develop property and government intervention to preserve land could be effectively balanced. Results showed that landowners’ desire to retain their property rights remains in conflict with their wish to see their communities remain rural in the face of new development. Medium-term residents may be the most motivated group to get involved in ways to balance landscape change and development with a need to preserve town character. According to study participants, local governments should focus their efforts on voluntary, cooperative measures. Such measures should ideally minimize bureaucracy and maximize a multi-jurisdictional approach in considering a variety of techniques to resolve tough land-use conflicts. Local land trusts emerged as the best-positioned entity to forge cooperative ventures with farmers, landowners, and others in protecting the places of greatest value to those who live and work in the rural landscape. The need for education and communication was vitally expressed. This study sheds new light on the different nuanced and sometimes conflicting attitudes about preserving the rural landscape, but also offers hope for solutions based on collaborations between local governments, land trusts, and local residents.

No description available.