Easement Sampling Survey: (State, Easement Name)



Annotated Survey Form

Original Survey and Supplement questions are integrated

Notations in purple show columns and coding of the Data

Every effort has been made to make this data set as complete and transparent as possible. Original Survey questions that were replaced by new or elaborated questions in the Supplement are retained here, but shown in grey. For strategic reasons and to protect the confidentiality of landowners, partners, and TNC business information, answers to a few questions are not included in the data set. Where this is the case it is indicated below. In a few instances, rather than omit the data, generalized versions of place names or taxa have been substituted.

DATA SHEET I

A Individual Easement Survey:

B - Easement Reference Number for this survey

I. Easement Overview

C 1.1 Easement name:       (omitted for confidentiality)

D 1.2 MABR IFMS Code (from CLS – on Terra’s list)      

(omitted for confidentiality)

E 1.3 Date easement established, (recording or TNC transaction date):      

F 1.4 Acreage:      

G 1.5 Which of the following applies:

1 Donation

3 Purchase

2 Partial Donation/Partial Purchase

4 Other

H Cost (if purchase or partial donation) $      (omitted for confidentiality)

I 1.6 Is this easement TNC’s first engagement with this property?

1 Yes

2 No

J (Answer to question above coded again for ease of tabulation with following items)

-1 Yes

0 No

If “No” how did TNC come to hold an easement here? (mark all that apply)

K TNC owned fee for a while but later conveyed it out, retaining an easement. Indicate year first acquired, if possible:      

L TNC purchased fee, intending to sell to a conservation buyer, but keep an easement.

M TNC had other engagement there prior to easement (e.g. management agreement, lease, registry). Indicate year of 1st engagement, if possible      

N Other     

1.7 Landowner Type

Coded as 0 for no and 1 for yes in its respective column.

Also coded by number indicated - in T (and U if applicable) for ease of roll up.

O Private Individual/family (#1 in columns T and U)

P Private Corporation (#2 in columns T and U)

Q Non-profit organization, (#3 in columns T and U)

(e.g. land trust, foundation, educational group) Specify      

R Federally Recognized Indian Tribe (#4 in columns T and U)

S Public Entity (#5 in columns T and U)

V Indicate type:

-1 not apply

1 Local (specify)      

2 State

3 Federal

W Please list any partners working with you on this easement, and their role:      

1.8 Owner History (mark one)

X 1st generation owner with previous knowledge of the property –

Current owner’s tenure precedes the existence of the easement. (Either owned the land from which the easement was purchased or owned adjacent or very nearby property and acquired that land as the first owner subject to the easement.)

Y 1st generation owner without previous knowledge if the property –

Current owner did not have pre-easement knowledge of the land as resident or near neighbor. Generally acquired the land from TNC subject to our easement.

Z 2nd generation family member owner of land subject to easement –

Current owner acquired the land already subject to the easement - by inheritance or otherwise through his/her immediate family.

AA 2nd generation unrelated owner of land subject to the easement -

Current owner acquired the land already subject to the easement by purchase or other wise from an unrelated party.

AB Other – please explain      

[pic]

DATA SHEET II

(New content begins with column G below)

II. Conservation Context

2.1 Ecological Context:

• G Habitat Type (WWF biomes): (name)

Please refer to the state biome map sent to you by Terra.

H (code for type below)

1 Temperate grasslands, savannas, shrublands

2 Mediterranean forests, woodlands, scrub

3 Temperate coniferous forests

4 Tropical grasslands, savannas, shrubland

5 Mediterranean forests, woodlands, scrub

6 Temperate broadleaf mixed forests

7 Tropical grasslands, savannas, shrublands

8 Deserts xeric shrublands

9 Montane grasslands shrublands

• I Ecoregion:       (Ecoregions are included in the data.

Refer back to column A for the state in which they are located.)

J 2.2 Does this easement exist in a portfolio site?*

1 Yes

0 No

• K Name of portfolio site:       (omitted for confidentiality)

• L Was it acquired before portfolio sites were identified?

1 Yes acquired before

0 No acquired after portfolio sites identified

* The Nature Conservancy uses the term “portfolio site” to describe one of the "selected set of places" which make up an ecoregional portfolio. The end product of ecoregional planning, this “portfolio” is a designed to represent the full distribution and diversity of native species, natural communities and ecosystems in an ecoregion.

2.3 How does this easement fit within your program’s conservation priorities and planning process ? The questions below are intended to get at how this easement fits within the many priorities of your state program:

• M Is there a Conservation Area Plan for the area in which easement exists?

1 Yes

0 No

• N If there is a Conservation Area Plan, what is the total acreage of that area?       (omitted for confidentiality)

• O How many acres of that Conservation Area does TNC plan to protect in fee and easement?       (omitted for confidentiality)

• P Is there a TNC Field representative working in area?

1 Yes

0 No

• Q Are any partners also working on this Conservation Area.      

1 Yes

0 No

Partners coded as:

R -Fed agencies

S -State agencies

T -County/City agencies

U -Local Land Trusts

V -Other orgs, funds

W -University

X -Private Corp/or Individual(s)

2.3 s1 Do you have any type of conservation plan the places this easement into a landscape context?

Yes – coded as Y or Z depending on type, as shown below

No - coded as AA along with “Don’t Know” - as shown below

Don’t know – coded as AA along with “No” - as shown below

Check all those that apply

Y 5-S

Z Other type (please describe)      

AA No, or don’t know

AB 2.3 s2 Do you have staff paying attention to this property beyond annual monitoring activities? Please describe      

1 Yes

2 No

0 Don’t know

3. To what extent does the easement complement or enhance other protected areas in the region? Many easements add value outside of their borders, because of neighboring protected areas or other easements. The questions below are intended to identify those cases.

• AC Does the easement share a border with any other protected areas, (local parks, other TNC holdings, etc.)?

1 Yes

0 No

AD If yes, Explain       What protected areas?

• AE If not physically contiguous with the easement, are there other protected lands in the immediate area?

0-n/a; no

1-within 1 mile

2-within 2 miles

3-within 5 miles

AF If yes, Explain       What protected areas?

4. AG Indicate which of the following contributed to the decision to use an easement as the protection tool at this site. Mark as many as apply.

Owner unwilling to sell full fee interest 

Easement more acceptable to the community than full fee purchase

Only enough money to purchase easement

Easement was donated

Other      

NOTE that respondents felt that the options presented in the version of this question above were inadequate to reflect the factors contributing to the decision to use an easement. While their initial responses are included in the spreadsheet, we worked from their responses to the elaborated question in the Supplement, which follows.

2.5 s1 Indicate which of the following contributed to the decision to use an easement as the protection tool at this site. This is a revision of question 2.5, (“why use conservation easement as a tool”) in the original survey. The point of elaborating this question is to better understand the many reasons for which we use easements. Please mark all items below that apply. (They are broken up into categories to help you think about this from different perspectives.) (coded with numbers below)

Landowner desire

AH #1 Owner unwilling to sell full fee interest 

AI #2 Owner wished to secure the conservation future of his/her land 

Financial issues

AJ #3 Easement cost-effective at less than full fee and sufficient to accomplish goals

AK #4TNC could not afford to buy full fee, but could afford easement

AL #5 Easement was donated

Community/Strategy

AM #6 Easement more acceptable to community than full fee (e.g. keeps land on tax rolls).

AN #7 TNC wanted to keep land in private ownership because private land use could be maintained, yet conservation goals could be accomplished, (e.g. preventing some resource-impacting activities and/or future conversion to more intensive land use).

Other

AO #8 TNC transferred out fee interest in property but retained easement

AP #9 Mitigation (protection accomplished by this easement serves as mitigation, regulatory or other value related to resource impacts elsewhere).

AQ #10 Other. Please explain      

2.5s2 Decision to use easement as tool at this site grouped by category

AR 1-Landowner Desire (1,2 above)

AS 2-Financial Issues (3,4,5 above)

AT 3-Community/Strategy (6,7 above)

AU 4-Other (8,9,10 above)

5. AV Which of the following describes the most intensive human activity within a 10 mile radius of this easement (check one):

#1 Wilderness (little human activity)

#2 Rural, but minimal land use

#3 Rural, but with commercial timber, grazing, farms and/or agriculture

#4 Rural residential (scattered residences, ranchettes and/or trophy homes)

#5 Residential subdivision (with or without retail or services)

#6 Industrial

AW 2.6 s1 Which of the following describes the predominant land use (covers the greatest area) within a twenty-mile-wide circle centered on this easement – (that is the10 mile radius noted above). Check one:

#1 Wilderness (little human activity)

#2 Rural, but minimal land use

#3 Rural, but with commercial timber, grazing, farms and/or agriculture

#4 Rural residential (scattered residences, ranchettes and/or trophy homes)

#5 Residential subdivision (with or without retail or services)

#6 Industrial

6. Are there existing structures on the property? Respond to the questions below and add comments where desired.

• AX Is there a structure that serves as the owner’s primary or secondary residence?            

0 No residences

1 Primary

2 Secondary

3 Don’t know

• AY Does the property have one or more residences occupied by employees of the owners?      

0 No employee residences

1 Yes

2 Don’t know

• AZ Do the terms of the easement permit the construction of additional residences?      

1 Yes

0 No

• BA Do the terms of the easement permit the construction of new structure(s) whose purpose is not as a residence?      

1 Yes

0 No

This question was replaced and elaborated in the Supplement with the more specific questions which follow:

BB 2.7 s1 Can the easement property be divided, (or subdivided)? That is, can the property be sold in two or more pieces – (regardless of whether these divisions were or were not in place at the time the easement was established).

1 Yes – or subdivision not addressed in easement

2 No – subdivision prohibited by easement

Easements which were silent on the subject of subdivision were coded “Yes” as permitting it. (The only exception is easement CA 10, which is explained with a comment.) However, it should be noted that, particularly with older easements, the drafting strategy for preventing new development was, instead, to prohibit or severely limit new structures. On lands where no or few new structures could be built there was reduced financial incentive to divide the property.

BC how many subdivisions are allowed?

- 1 Not specified in the document

1 One,

2 Two,

3 Three, etc.

For each division permitted, please provide the size of the divisions (in acres) and the size of any building envelopes that are defined by the easement:

1.       BD acres, with       BE square foot building envelope

Notes:      

-Same fields above repeated for each permitted division -

2.       acres, with       square foot building envelope Notes:      

3.       acres, with       square foot building envelope Notes:      

Add additional divisions and their building envelopes, or other notes below:

     

BF 2.7 s2 Does the easement permit construction of new structures?

- 1 Not specified in the document

1 Yes

2 No

BG Number allowed:

- 1 Not specified in the document

1 One,

2 Two,

3 Three, etc.

BH note the building envelope in acres provided for each structure:

- 1 Not specified

xx specific number of acres if specified.

Please note the type of each new structure allowed, and the square footage permitted for each, if defined in the easement:

-Same fields below repeated for each permitted structure -

1. BI Type:       BJ Structure size (e.g. sq.ft) permitted      

2. Type:       Structure size (e.g. sq.ft) permitted      

3. Type:       Structure size (e.g. sq.ft) permitted      

Add additional structures and their sizes, or other notes below:

      - process continues through BR –

In retrospect, the structure of the survey did not make it easy to tabulate or sort some information. (For example, where structures exceed the three spaces provided, respondents simply listed them in one or more of the spaces provided, or as with easements TX85, TX89 and TX90 added a comment in column BF.)

Some other information, particularly relative to cumulative portion of the easement which fell into building envelope(s), could not be extracted from the response we collected. (For example, if there are two building envelopes listed of 5 acres each, was that a total of 5 acres for structures or a total of 10 acres?)  For this reason, we went back to the easement documents to specifically tabulate clarify this question as noted on page 9 with new question CD.

2.8 Are there any commercial use(s) of the property?

• If yes, which of the following describe the commercial use of the property associated with the easement: Check as many as apply.

BS #1Farm – field crops or orchard

BT #2Vineyard

BU #3Ranch – grazing (inc. dairy & mowing for hay)

BV #4Forestry

BW #5Hostelry (e.g. dude ranch, B&B, camp ground)

BX #6Recreation (incl. private hunt club, or fishing club/guiding)

BY #7Other:      

9. Are there any public and/or educational uses of the property? Please check the current human uses on the property (actual activities, regardless of whether they are identified as purposes in the easement terms):

BZ #1 Public Recreation (if commercial, also include in 2.7 above)      

CA #2 Other Public Access      

CB #3 Education/Research      

CC #4 Other:      

CD Total acres of building envelope (new field added)

size In acres

0 No new buildings allowed (a non-building structure may be allowed).

-1 No building envelope specified for allowed buildings

It should be noted that any acreage restriction on new buildings was characterized as a “building envelope” for the purposes of this study. Easements on some ranches restricted ranching-related structures to a “Base of Operations Zone” of a specified number of acres. These were included in the total, along with small building footprints more typically characterized as “building envelopes”.

[pic]

DATA SHEET III

(New content begins with column G below)

III. Easement Purposes

G 3.1 What is/are the stated purpose(s) of the easement, as written in the recorded

easement document?      

Coded as noted below in Spreadsheet III, columns H - AJ.

|code |Easement purposes (This coding used for |

| |questions 3.1, 3.2 and 3.6) |

|#1 |retain property/habitat undisturbed in natural state/condition |

|#2 |prohibit certain further development activities, fragmentation |

|#3 |protect endangered species |

|#4 |protect marine/aquatic habitat or communities (e.g. shoreline, wetlands) |

|#5 |protect habitat for migration routes |

|#6 |protect unique features (e.g. cliff, geothermal, etc) |

|#7 |buffer for habitat or feature |

|#8 |contribute to viability/connectivity of surrounding protected areas |

|#9 |protection of larger landscape through conservation easements |

|#10 |manage in accordance with a conservation plan or agreement |

|#11 |restoration activities |

|#12 |satisfy mitigation components |

|#13 |protection of historic value (e.g. land uses, structures) |

|#14 |compatible grazing, heritage ranching |

|#15 |species re-introduction site |

|#16 |natural water and nutrient retention, with rights to flood, flow and store water upon property |

|#17 |accommodation of educational and/or scientific activities/facilities |

|#18 |public benefit: access, services, and/or scenic enjoyment |

|#19 |demonstrating easements as effective conservation tool for area (e.g. forest conservation, ranch |

| |stewardship) |

|#20 |priority acquisition for TNC or other partners |

|#21 |donor cultivation |

|#22 |landowner/community relations |

|#23 |partner relations |

|#24 |board member relations |

|#25 |owner preferred TNC over other partners (e.g. government, land trust) |

|#26 |easement acquisition required (e.g. by grant, lawsuit) |

|#27 |sold through/involved in conservation buyer program |

|#28 |prevent uses that would impair, degrade or interfere with conservation values |

|#29 |any commercial use |

AK-BM 3.2 If additional easement purposes are noted in the project package, and that information is available, list them here:       (coded as noted in Question 3.1 above)

3.3 Rank the contributions of this easement in support of target viability:

List the easement’s top targets below, (up to five). (Note that some easements may contribute to the viability of targets that are off-site or on adjacent or nearby lands.)

Indicate the easement’s most important contribution to target viability with: “1” most important contribution. (If also serves another purpose for that target mark it with “2” secondary but important contribution.)

BN Target #1      

BO Core property with targets on site

1 most important

2 secondary but important contribution

0 n/a

BP Buffer

1 most important

2 secondary but important contribution

0 n/a

BQ Connectivity

1 most important

2 secondary but important contribution

0 n/a

BR Other:      

1 most important

2 secondary but important contribution

0 n/a

3.3 s1 Please type below the names of the targets you listed in section 3.3 of the Individual Easement Survey. The questions below are intended to determine what we actually know about how the targets are doing on the easement property, (or in the case of corridor lands – what we know about whether the targets are actually using them).

Target #1. Name     

BT Is this easement a core property or corridor for this target?

0 – No (stop here)

1 – Yes (answer below)

Is target being monitored on easement area?(BU-BX coded 0 for not marked, 1 for marked)

BU – not apply

BV Target is being monitored qualitatively (e.g. noticing presence or absence, photopoints for ecological monitoring, etc). Please briefly describe      

BW Target is being monitored quantitatively. Please briefly describe      

BX Target is not being monitored. Notes:      

BY Is the target still extant on the property?

1 – Yes

2 – No

3 – Unknown

BZ If yes, please select the relative status of that target

1 – Don’t know quailty when easement established

2 – Same or Better than when easement established

3 – Has Declined since easement established

4 – Don’t Know Current Status

CA Target #2       (each item below coded as 1, 2 or 0, as noted above in Target 1)

CB Core property with targets on site

CC Buffer

CD Connectivity

CE Other:      

3.3 s1 Supplement here for Target 2 is recorded in columns CG-CM following the same coding as show for the Supplement addition to Target 1 above.

CN Target #3       (each item below coded as 1, 2 or 0, as noted above in Target 1)

CO Core property with targets on site

CP Buffer

CQ Connectivity

CR Other:      

3.3 s1 Supplement here for Target 3 is recorded in columns CT-CZ following the same coding as show for the Supplement addition to Target 1 above.

DA Target #4       (each item below coded as 1, 2 or 0, as noted above in Target 1)

DB Core property with targets on site

DC Buffer

DD Connectivity

DE Other:      

3.3 s1 Supplement here for Target 4 is recorded in columns DG-DM following the same coding as show for the Supplement addition to Target 1 above.

DN Target #5       (each item below coded as 1, 2 or 0, as noted above in Target 1)

DO Core property with targets on site

DP Buffer

DQ Connectivity

DR Other:      

3.3 s1 Supplement here for Target 5 is recorded in columns DT-DZ following the same coding as show for the Supplement addition to Target 1 above.

3.4 For those cases above in which the easement is for an on-site target, indicate

below whether the target has been documented on that site through direct

observation by TNC or other credible source.

Please type in the name of on-site targets from above.

BS 1.       DF 4.      

CF 2.       DS 5.      

CS 3.      

(responses to item 3.4 above coded as follows)

0 - No

1 - Yes

2 - Don’t Know

3 - n/a – Not an on-site target

3.5 Rank the threat abatement contributions of the property:

Rank each category with “1” being the most important, 2 being the second most

important, 3 being the third most important, “N/A” if not applicable

Abates threat of Fragmentation (e.g. roading and/or subdivision) EV

Abates threat of Altered Fire Regime FC

Abates threat of Hydrological Alteration FJ

Abates threat of Invasive Species (e.g. grazing for vernal pool health) EA

Abates threat of Conversion/Development FR

Abates threat of Incompatible Forestry EH

Abates threat of Incompatible Recreation (e.g. ATVs) EO

Abates Other threat:       FZ

1 - being the most important

2 - being the second most important

3 - being the third most important

0 - N/A if not applicable

Abated threats ranked “1”, “2” or “3” in the Original Survey above were carried forward into the Supplement below and evaluated further as noted.

In the following question, please pay special attention to the fact that threat abatement was evaluated from two different frames of reference: Abatement of the first three threats was assessed within the easement, and abatement of the following five threats was assessed at the project or landscape level.

3.5 s1 Threat abatement contributions of the property:

This subject was addressed in the individual survey. The elaboration here is intended to capture what is known about the success of the easement in abating its threat both on-site and in its project context. For the threats applicable to this easement, please indicate whether the easement has made progress in abating that threat and indicate what kind of monitoring produced the information used to make that determination.

Threats assessed within this easement

Coding for abatement of threats assessed

within the easement:

0 - This threat not identified as among the three most important in question 3.5

1 - Steady state: threat has not increased on easement

2 - Progress made in abating threat on easement

3 - Threat has increased on easement lands

4 - N/A

Invasive Species EB - EG

Threat is being monitored qualitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is being monitored quantitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is not being monitored. Notes if applicable      

Incompatible Forestry EI - EN

Threat is being monitored qualitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is being monitored quantitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is not being monitored. Describe if applicable      

Incompatible Recreation (e.g. ATVs) EP- EU

Threat is being monitored qualitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is being monitored quantitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is not being monitored. Describe if applicable      

Note that many respondents observed that some responses may be misleading because an easement’s impact on threat abatement at the project level (see below) was much more powerful in a mature project where it added to existing protected area, than early in a multi-transaction protection effort where much of the area remained at risk.

Threats assessed at the project or landscape level

Coding for abatement of threats assessed

at the project or landscape level:

0 - This threat not identified as among the three most important in question 3.5

1 - Steady state: threat has not increased

2 - Progress – threat had been reduced

3 - Loss – threat has increased

4 - N/A

Fragmentation (e.g. roading and/or subdivision) EW - FB

Threat is being monitored qualitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is being monitored quantitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is not being monitored. Describe if applicable      

Altered Fire Regime FD - FI

Threat is being monitored qualitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is being monitored quantitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is not being monitored. Describe if applicable      

Hydrological Alteration FK - FQ

Threat is being monitored qualitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is being monitored quantitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is not being monitored. Describe if applicable      

Conversion/Development FS - FY

Threat is being monitored qualitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is being monitored quantitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is not being monitored. Describe if applicable      

Other (fill in)      GA – GG (see comment GA lines CA 19 and CA21)

Threat is being monitored qualitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is being monitored quantitatively. Please briefly describe      

Threat is not being monitored. Describe if applicable

GH 3.6 In your own words, are there additional programmatic purposes of this

easement, in relation to the conservation activities of your chapter? That is, the

specific biodiversity conservation reasons, outside of those purposes stated in the

easement document and covered above, for which this easement was acquired, (e.g.

partner relations, starting point in credibility with the project area community,

learning opportunity for restoration, donor cultivation etc..) Please be as specific as

possible.      

(Additional purposes were coded using the same numbers as noted in Question 3.1 above)

GI 3.7 Do management plans exist for the property?

• GJ If management plan(s) do exist for the easement, do they require that TNC approve them?      

• GK If management plan(s) exist, do they include components to protect identified targets?      

Questions were asked in the Individual Survey regarding management plans on conservation easements. They are elaborated and clarified below.

GL 3.7 s1 Does the easement call for a management plan specifically for this property? (Either immediately, or triggered buy certain circumstances, or exercise of rights or activities in the future.)

1 – Yes

2 – No

GM 3.7 s2 Is there such a plan(s) in place at this time?

1 – Yes

2 – No

• GN Did easement terms require that TNC approve the plan?      

1 – Yes

2 – No

• GO Does the plan include components to protect identified targets?      

1 – Yes

– No

3.7 s2 If intended or existing management plans are referenced in the easement, please describe       text field not coded

Where specifically in the easement is this language found?       text field not coded

[pic]

DATA SHEET IV (sections IV, V & VI)

(New content begins with column G below)

VI. Baseline Documentation

We would like to collect the baseline documentation for a small subset of our “sample easements.” We are requesting that you send this documentation for only the six easements identified in the list Terra sent you. Please send a copy of the baselineyou’re your three 1985-1994 easements, and for your three 1995-2004 easements. If you do not have a baseline report for any of those requested, please submit one for the next easement on Terra’s list in that time frame. This will give us three from each period and a total of six from your state. We appreciate your patience in extracting this documentation.

G 4.1 Does a formal baseline documentation report exist for this easement?

0 - No

1 - Yes

• H Is that baseline document among those that will be included in the six sent to Terra from your state?

These documents are not included for land owner confidentiality.

0 - No

1 - Yes

If “Yes”, please Xerox baseline documentation and mail to:

Terra Grandmason, WAFO

217 Pine Street #1100

Seattle, WA 98101

[pic]

V. Monitoring

5.1 Is this easement monitored for compliance with easement terms?

• I Date last monitored: xx/xx/xxxx

Date Field - see spread sheet

Note: a date in ( ) is last record of status if not from monitoring.

• J Monitoring methods used (standard forms, unofficial site visits):            text field responses coded as noted below

-1-NA easement transferred out & now held by other entity

1 -Standard forms

2 -Non-standard forms

3 -Official site visit

4 -Unofficial site visit

5 - Baseline Document Report (new easement)

6 – Other or Don’t Know

• K Status of compliance at last monitoring:

-1-N/A

1- OK

2- Pending, being reviewed

3- Violation

4- Not assessed

L (administrative – not a survey question)

M 5.1 s2 If status of compliance in Individual Easement Survey is “Pending(being reviewed)” or “Violation,” please check the non-compliance categories that apply and explain. (Indicate and describe multiple violations, if applicable) coded as shown

0 – Not Apply

1      De minimus non-compliance- problem that ended quickly, without significant or lasting impacts on conservation values, and did not benefit the owner (e.g. lack of required legal notice or pre-approval for permitted activities). Please explain      

2      Violation that resulted in significant impact to conservation values of easement. Please explain      

3      Owner experienced economic benefit from violating easement terms (e.g. did prohibited gravel mining or constructed illegal structure). Explain      

4      Entity that violated easement terms is known to be an unrelated third party for whom the property owner is not responsible (i.e. not employee, friend, family member) – examples include local utility district, vandalism, theft of timber, etc. Please explain      

N 5.2 Are ecological conditions on the easement area monitored?

0 - No

1 - Yes

• O If so, why and how?      

-1 – Not Apply

or Text field

• P Is the MOS workbook used to organize/inform this monitoring?

0 - No

1 - Yes

Q If ecological conditions are not being monitored, why is that the case?

Coded as noted:

1 Not needed

2 Don’t know what/how to monitor

3 Lack of monitoring implementation capacity (skill set)

4 Inadequate funding

5 Other:      

R 5.3 If this easement is NOT monitored for ecological conditions, do you have a plan/intent for monitoring that will assess TNC’s ecological outcomes there?

-1 – Not Apply

0 - No

1 - Yes

• S If yes, describe your plan or intentions:      

T 5.4 How much does the ecological monitoring currently taking place on this

easement cost per year (hard costs and staff time)?       The 28 responses provided ranged from a low of $50 to a high of $100,000. Many indicated work is nested in larger, landscape-scale efforts, often with partner groups or agencies.

[pic]

VI. Easements 5 + Years Old:

U 6.1 Does this easement retain the features or conservation values (e.g., buffer, target species and communities) for which it was originally protected?

-1 -NA

0 - No

1 - Yes

2 -Not sure

V Please explain.       Text field

W 6.2 In your opinion, is the easement accomplishing any additional purposes and

goals for which it was established? (including any noted in 3.6 above).

0-No

1-Yes

2-Does not apply

3-Only partly

X Please explain

Text field

[pic]

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download