Rob,
I hate to keep being a naysayer to these types of ideas, because I
do see the general concept as something very positive for us. However
the Nature Conservancy might not be the best choice either. This page
has them on record actively opposing the statewide ballot measure
Proposition 90, a solid eminent domain abuse reform and property
rights protection measure that was voted down in 2006...
http://www.nature.org/wherewework/northamerica/states/california/
features/noprop90.html
...and I've read elsewhere that they have collaborated with
government agencies to acquire property via eminent domain. One
property rights site ( http://prfamerica.org/speeches/6th/
EminentDomainCurrentStatusFutureDirections.html ) reports:
"The eminent domain procedures law was enacted to protect the
interests of the private property owner. I’ve read you the purpose.
That purpose is backed up by the Constitution of the United States.
No person should be deprived of property without due process of law
and fair compensation. But, in reality, there’s alliance that has
been going on between such groups — again, this is a common theme
that you have heard all day — between The Nature Conservancy, land
trusts, other not-for-profits."
"The State of New York has raised this to a very interesting thing
that we are working on developing a challenge to. They partnered
themselves with these not-for- profits to escape or circumvent the
protections of this very statute. The reason the Pine Barrens
Commission with the people on Long Island did not put in for eminent
domain is because they were afraid they would have to pay fair market
value, which is what they should pay."
Is anyone aware of other, perhaps smaller and less politically well-
heeled organizations doing similar conservation work?
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))