The real estate company that cares

The Native Forest Council founder Timothy G. Hermach criticized the Nature Conservancy for its practice to sell land in Texas to its own trustees, who then allowed drilling for oil in the formerly protected areas. After the press exposed these and other actions, the Nature Conservancy established a risk evaluation committee and explored ways to mitigate the damage. Hermach still calls the conservancy “the real estate company that cares.”

TNC sparks tax battle in Wisconsin

The Nature Conservancy notified Sauk County Wisconsin officials that the organization would no longer be paying taxes on 9,000 acres located in several parcels. TNC also announced that it was eliminating two local jobs due to financial difficulties. The change will be devastating to some local towns. An official for one of the towns affected said they would lose more than 50% of their tax revenue used to provide municipal services. The Nature Conservancy proposes making voluntary payments totaling about half of the former tax bill to help make up for the shortfall.
Other than the federal government, The Nature Conservancy is the only landowner with property in all 50 states that is exempt from income taxes and can also stipulate that it will not pay local property taxes. One of the Wisconsin municipal officials is quoted as saying "When they purchased that property, they said they were going to be good residents of the municipalities and they were going to pay property taxes," said supervisor Paul Endres of North Freedom. "If they aren't going to pay property taxes, they should sell the property."
According to the most recent financial filings, The Nature Conservancy had 1.4 billion in revenue and only $900 million in expenses. As a tax-exempt entity, the $500 million net revenue is also exempt from income tax.

The Nature Conservancy blamed for decline in US fish population

The Nature Conservancy is notoriously recognized in the "Cold, Dead Fish Awards in 2008" for their actions contributing to the decline of U.S. fish populations. Indybay.org reports that this year's competition was fierce "as corrupt politicians, agribusiness leaders, corporate polluters and their allies launched a full-scale offensive on the imperiled fish populations of California and the West".

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/02/06/18568658.php

Paniced municipalities blame The Nature Conservancy

Only hours after The Nature Conservancy announced that it is reacting to property tax increases by refusing to pay them, local governments are responding by warning of the coming financial problems within their communities. Municipal governments pay for schools, roads and local services through property taxes. In some municipalities The Nature Conservancy is both the largest landowner and the largest taxpayer. If they don't pay their fair share, the community can be financially devastated.

The Nature Conservancy is the world's largest real estate broker with earned revenues and cash reserves that exceed the amounts of most of the nation's largest for-profit businesses. There is no doubt that The Nature Conservancy could afford to pay its tax bill. Municipal governments do not have the legal authority to force The Nature Conservancy to pay taxes on property it owns so some people are now calling for federal legislation to force The Nature Conservancy to pay.

When private citizens and for-profit companies do not pay their real estate tax bill, the property can be seized and sold at auction in a process known as a "tax sale". This procedure does not currently apply to non-profit corporations like The Nature Conservancy. We support proposed federal legislation that would extend the same procedures to land owned by The Nature Conservancy.

http://www.wiscnews.com/spe/news/432892

The Nature Conservancy cuts local WI school revenues

The Nature Conservancy announced that it will stop paying taxes on the land it owns in some rural communities- taxes that local government use to fund schools, roads and other critical local services.

Rural communities that are locates in areas where The nature Conservancy is the largest landowner know that they cannot financially survive without TNCs support, so this could be the beginning of the end of these communities. We suppose that after some years of struggle these communities will deteriorate financially, people will move out, foreclosures will increase, and property values will fall.

But have no fear, once the communities start to look like ghost towns then The Nature Conservancy will be there to buy up the remaining properties from the former residents for at pennies on the former dollar value and then sell this land back to the state's taxpayers at a big profit.

http://www.wiscnews.com/bnr/news/432811

13% of earth now protected by environmentalists

The Nature Conservancy turned heads earlier this year by announcing an ambitious plan to protect 10% of the world's total land. This appeared to be a strikingly ambitious land acquisition endeavor; in fact the largest real estate acquisition proposal in history. But with declining land prices and a worldwide credit crunch, the cash-rich Nature Conservancy has often the only available buyer to farmers and landowners who need to sell. It is not surprising that conservation land deals are moving forward at a record pace this year. Still, no one expected to find such a dramatic change in land conservation totals so quickly.

Now Mark Spalding, senior marine scientist with The Nature Conservancy announces that 13% of the world's land surface is now protected open space in a new book "The World's Protected Areas, examines the relationship between people and protected areas". Mr. Spalding says that the amount of protected land is now equivalent in size to the total amount of the world's croplands. It is not clear whether TNC underestimates the amount of land previously under conservation prior to announcing its goal or whether the land acquisition project has progressed beyond its stated goals.

In the past The Nature Conservancy has relied primarily on a strategy of purchasing open land from private landowners and selling the land back to local governments at higher prices. This strategy vaulted TNC the world's wealthiest organizations. More recently, TNC began promoting a conservation easement program that allows farmers and rural landowners to continue to own and use the land, but prevented future development. Purchasing easements is less expensive than purchasing land and may be better for preserving the stability of rural and agricultural communities.

No comment has be issued by The Nature Conservancy about how this recent announcement of 13% will affect its plans for future land acquisitions. It seems reasonable possible given the current worldwide real estate market that environmental groups like TNC could continue to acquire land at a rapid pace and possible boost the total amount of protected land to 15% to 20% of the earth's surface. It seems unlikely that attainment of the 10% goal would deter TNC from future land acquisitions.

Mr. Spalding points out that our waterways and oceans are not equally protected, with only 1/2 of one percent of the world's oceans under conservation easement. Freshwater protection is even lower. This might represent the next major "growth market" for TNC acquisitions with potential consequences on water users and fishing industries. Noting that this major announcement is made by a marine scientist lends credibility to my suspicion that TNC is gearing for an increase in oceanic and waterway ventures. The fact that Mr. Spalding's announcement was strategically published overseas in The Daily Telegraph rather than in more critical U.S. news sources (due to the current political debate on use of offshore oil reserves) also makes me believe that this book announcement is part of a larger strategic maneuver by TNC.

conservation at any cost

Coverage of The Nature Conservancy's brokerage of Grandfather Mountain in North Carolina mentions by Triangle Business Journal completely ommitted the financial details of the deal. Taxpayers would likely be shocked at the hefty price they are paying for the brokerage services of The Nature Conservancy. Yet if news reporters like this one at Triangle Busines Journal take their coverage facts solely from the press releases put out by The Nature Conservancy, we are certain to avoid focus on the cost to taxpayers or the huge brokerage payments paid for the deals. Clearly The Nature Conservancy relies on a "conservation at any cost" mentality of Americans today to continue to accrue hundreds of millions of profits (sorry, TNC is "non-profit" and non-taxable so we don't call the money "profits"). The ability to sell to taxpayers and governments makes TNC the world's largest and richest land broker.

We are not saying that this deal is not in the best interest of taxpayers or that the motives are suspect, but we are saying that full disclosure and reporting of the financial aspects of these huge transactions is absolutely essential.

Partnering with Poisoners

The Nature Conservancy takes more heat for its partnerships with the largest and most motorious large corporations including:
"Alcoa — massive polluter and consumer of energy
American Electric Power – coal burning (73%) electricity producer
Bank of America — will invest in anything, regardless of impact
BP – oil giant and greenwasher supreme
Cargill – food giant, GMO user on massive scale
Caterpillar – provides military equipment to repressive regimes"

http://thesietch.org/mysietch/keith/2008/04/19/the-nature-conservancy-partnering-with-poisoners/

Funding for the Environmentalist Industry

Perception v Reality Blog wrote about the funding of the environmental movement:

"In a dazzling display of raw power, foundations with interlocking directorates funded the Nature Conservancy in 1996 to the tune of $203,886,056, or 60 percent of its annual revenue. Initially the foundations banded together under the name Environmental Grantmakers Affinity Group of the Council on Foundations. Under the umbrella of Rockefeller Family Fund 136 foundations formed the Environmental Grantmakers Association (EGA) in 1987 which has grown to over 200 by the end of the twentieth century. Congressman RichardPombo (R-CA) claimed in 1999 that there are "3,400 full time employees,including leaders who often make $150,000 or more, as well as a small army of outside contractors such as scientists, lobbyists, lawyers, and public affairs specialists" in Washington DC. Citing a 1999 Boston Globe article, Congressman Pombo said: …"foundations invest at least $400 million a year in environmental advocacy and research. The largest environmental grant-maker, Pew Charitable Trusts, gives more than $35 million annually to environmental groups ".....When the additional 2,300 foundations that donate to environmental activism are considered, plus the billion dollars or so contracted to environmental organizations by various agencies of the federal government, the Boston Globe [newspaper] estimates the total funding for environmental activism to be around four billion dollars annually!"

We suspect that the U.S. public is largely unaware of the tremendous size and awesome power of the environmental advocacy industry.

The Nature Conservancy Criticized in Montana Meetings

Montana residents criticized The Nature Conservancy when it attempted to drum up public support while continuing to hold closed door meetings on the 320,000 acre Plum Creek project. If completed it would be the largest conservation land deal in the U.S.

This effort is a delicate line for The Nature Conservancy. They want and need public support to continue funding all of their land deals, but if the financial details of a project were made public, then the outcry might be so strong as to crush the deal.

The Nature Conservancy is the nation's largest land broker and they have professional resources that could make our heads spin. The Nature Conservancy is seeking $250 million tax dollars and $260 million in private donations for this project alone. Profits to The Nature Conservancy on the deal were not disclosed. One neighbor said "If it seems like too good of a deal, it might not be. Be careful. Be vigilant.” Another simply said “I think we all smell a rat”.

http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2008/08/01/news/mtregional/news07.txt

At the Mercy of Environmentalists

Recent mainstream news coverage on the possibility of offshore drilling has raised public awareness of how powerful extremist environmental groups like The Nature Conservancy really are. It is becoming increasingly clear that environmentalists are to blame for today's high food prices, the idiotic plan to produce fuel from grain and the stalled U.S. energy industry. These multi-billion dollar organizations hold a virtual stranglehold on our Congress.

Investors Business Daily covered this topic in detail, and it should send shivers down the spine of any clear-thinking American. There groups are as dangerous to our future as any threat on the horizon. While some have already given in (one writer said "you don't want to make enemies with The Nature Conservancy), others should take notice of the the veracity of the attacks against scientists, politicians and anyone else who expresses views contrary to The Nature Conservancy. This should be warning to us all.

One blogger writes "The massive damage these organizations have done is only a prelude to what they're planning as they use the global warming scare to ram dangerous new laws through Congress to allow this or prohibit that". Scary.

The Nature Conservancy as an energy broker

The article at http://constitutionalmatters.com/oped/environmentalists-orchestrating-our-oil-woes?commented=0#txpCommentInputForm points out the pros and cons of drilling for gas and oil on America's protected lands.

One thing that appears clear is that The Nature Conservancy has quite a financial windfall after gathering these lands at rock-bottom prices, gaining funding from public sources and now owing the land on top of the largest energy reserves in North America.

TNC clashes with Hawaii constitution

The state constitution provides hunting rights for native Hawaiians on state lands. Article 12, Section 7 on the Hawaiian Constitution says "The State reaffirms and shall protect all rights, customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious purposes and possessed by ahaupua’a tenants who are descendants of native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian Islands prior to 1778, subject to the right of the State to regulate such rights." TNC manages much of the native Hawaiian land on Molokai and is taking additional conservation programs that concern local residents.

Locals questioned how TNC was going to work to protect native Hawaiian gathering rights. It is not surprising that they are getting little of no information from The Nature Conservancy about its plans. TNC's mission would appear to be in direct opposition to the state constitution on this issue. Given TNC's history of bullyiny tactics, the residents have good reason to be concerned that their rights will be trampled.

See http://www.molokaitimes.com/articles/86917575.asp

Protecting developers from falling land prices

The Nature Conservancy provides a financial parachute for commercial developers who purchased land but then found that declining real estate markets made commercial development impossible. While American homeowners have to suffer the full effects of recent real estate price corrections, developers find that land trusts are eager buyers to bail them out of financial blunders. See the Wall Street Journal article May 9, 2008 at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121028811193679127.html?mod=hps_us_inside_today.

Cristina Mestre of The Nature Conservancy is quoted as saying that as a result of the market drop TNC is being approached en masse to buy development rights from owners of large tracts of land. These conservation easements are a relatively new tool in the real estate industry and there are both positives and negatives to consider from the perspective of public policy.

Spin breeds more spin

A small startup company in Texas called Avasaire Cosmetics announced that a portion of all its sales will be going to The Nature Conservancy. I don't blame them; it is smat marketing. Cosmetics is a competitive business playing almost completely on image and public perception. Market positioning is everything. The Nature Conservancy certainly knows this. Among their greatest achievements is the development of a public image as "the good guy" leading the cause toward worldwide conservation while diverting attention from the corruption within the organization, shady political dealings, bullying of private land owners and a pattern of greed that would make any Fortune 500 company blush. But a small business aligning itself with TNC is certainly a smart marketing move. Unfortunately we all know that brilliant product marketing has lead to some really awful things for our society (think junk foods, video games, bottled water, SUVs, etc.).

I wrote the small company owners to suggest they find a more worthy environmental group to support. There are plenty of them - unfortunately none with the marketing savvy or ability to spin public opinion like TCN.

Landowners Beware

The National Center for Public Policy Research is publicizing a paper "Conservation Easements: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly," posted online at www.nationalcenter.org/NPA569.html. The paper details many of the concerns expressed here on this forum and includes stories of individuals and families whose lives have been unturned by the powerful legal resources of The Nature Conservancy. The story also throws light on the issue of The Nature Conservancy's hugely profitable business model that centers on "flipping" conservation easements to the government at taxpayer expense. The underlying issue is that the public is not aware of the huge power that The Nature Conservancy has amassed as the largest and most profitable land broker and their track record in using that power against property owners.

A press release titled "Landowners Beware - The Government's Found a New Way to Control Your Land" was released today.

Tax watchdogs criticize The Nature Conservancy deal

Grassley Watch blog criticises the inclusion of $250 million taxpayer funds that goes to The Nature Conservancy under the much-criticized recent farm bill. The "tax refund" to the tax-exempt organization amounts to nothing more than a subsidy.

Citizens Against Government Waste, another consumer watchdog, is also criticizing the federal grant that subsidizes The Nature Conservancy for the purchase of a tract of land known as Plum Creek. See http://swineline.org/2008/05/20/if-an-earmark-falls-in-the-forest-does-anyone-hear-it/. The author refers to The Nature Conservancy as a "gazillionaire environmental group".

The Republican Study Committee says:
"The Plum Creek Timber Company is attempting to sell the land to the “Nature Conservancy” – which the Washington Post exposed as the “world’s richest environmental group, amassing $3 billion in assets.” The earmark would allow the Nature Conservancy to claim a $250 million “tax refund,” providing incentive for the group to purchase the land from Plum Creek. The tax refund would be provided even though the Nature Conservancy is a non-profit group that does not pay taxes".

Georgia Governor profits from land deal

Georgia’s Governor Purdue is implicated in a land scandal where apparently he “flipped” land in 2006 for a substantial profit that was located adjacent to the Oaky Woods land development project. The Nature Conservancy tried to buy the land at less than market value with a government-issued restriction on its use that would have made it useless to developers. The Governor refused to pave the way for the deal proposed by The Nature Conservancy. Perhaps he wondered why The Nature Conservancy should be the sole entity to profit from the government’s power to control land use. The land was then sold to developers instead at a much higher price; apparently about three times what The Nature Conservancy was trying to negotiate. The Governor made a profit of more than $450,000 on land that he owned for a mere 18 months.

We all recognize the value of setting aside natural lands for preservation. But the strategy commonly employed The Nature Conservancy employs to acquire land at less than fair market value hurts the land owners, the local community and ultimately the state’s taxpayers. The practice has been hugely successful in helping The Nature Conservancy pile up billions in tax-free profits on land deals throughout the nation. Local taxpayers pay the price as this land is immediately removed from the community’s tax base that is used as the primary source of funding for schools and roads. To add insult to injury, this land is often re-sold back to the state to be used as a park at substantial profit for The Nature Conservancy. While this is not an excuse for the Governor's behavior, the TNC actions to secure profits in land acquisition deals are no more acceptable than flipping land by an investor with inside control.

http://oconeedemocrat.blogspot.com/2006/10/oaky-woods-has-perdue-in-sticky-wicket.html

The Nature Conservancy vs. Native Americans

In 2006 The Nature Conservancy won a legal action to force the Pala Band of Mission Indians to pay them $545,000 for unknowingly violating a provision of the Clean Water Act. The tribe had allowed members to conduct a mining operation on tribal land and the water runoff affected neighboring land owned by The Nature Conservancy. When the Nature Conservancy took legal action, the Native Americans were outgunned in terms of legal representation and legal defense funds. When the verdict was announced Tribal leaders did not know how they would raise the money to pay the multi-billion dollar Nature Conservancy from their over-strained budget. The Nature Conservancy does not need the money from the lawsuit and admitted that it planned to use the money to buy even more land near the reservation.

Apparently The Nature Conservancy’s commitment to preservation does not include preservation of the welfare of Native Americans.

See http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2006/10/17/news/inland/9_01_5110_16_06.txt for an article reporting the legal settlement.

Florida Thrills The Nature Conservancy

Florida legislature voted to fund open land purchase programs by going $300 million into debt. The Daytona Beach New Journal reported that the cost was only $25 million – the cost to finance the debt. This comment sounds like the logic of a teenager with their first credit card. The money will be raised by making further cuts in health services to Florida residents.

The paper quotes The Nature Conservancy’s political lobbyist Janet Bowman saying "We are thrilled," "We are ecstatic." She should be. She just won her employer a $300 million pool of funds that can be used for land brokerage deals that can be leveraged into even much more money using partnership arrangements with local governments around the state.