Enforcing Conservation Easements: The Through Line

48 Pages Posted: 11 Jan 2022 Last revised: 17 Oct 2022

See all articles by Nancy A. McLaughlin

Nancy A. McLaughlin

University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law

Date Written: May 23, 2022


In enforcement cases, courts tend to treat conservation easements as if they were traditional servitudes. This poses a major risk to the effectiveness of conservation easements as land protection tools. If, for example, courts extinguish conservation easements via merger, or bar holders from enforcing them on laches or estoppel grounds, or interpret them in favor of free use of property, many of the conservation gains made in the United States over the last three decades could end up being ephemeral.

This article tackles this problem by providing a solid foundation for the next chapter in conservation easement enforcement. It clearly articulates the ways in which conservation easements are different from traditional servitudes. It provides a roadmap of often-overlooked bodies of law relevant to their enforcement. It also brings together the handful of enforcement cases in which the courts (in one case, the dissenting judges) recognized the special status of conservation easements. These cases address different issues but there is a clear unifying themeā€”a through line: conservation easements are created to benefit the public and carry out legislatively stated public purposes, and it is contrary to the public interest to blindly apply to them principles intended to facilitate the marketability and development of land or resolve disputes between private parties.

Armed with this knowledge, courts as well as nonprofit and government holders will be far better equipped to deal with the coming wave of enforcement cases in a manner that protects the public interest.

Keywords: conservation easement, enforcement, merger, strict construction, laches, estoppel

JEL Classification: K11, K32, Q18, Q24, Q30

Suggested Citation

McLaughlin, Nancy A., Enforcing Conservation Easements: The Through Line (May 23, 2022). 34 Georgetown Environmental Law Review 167 (2022), University of Utah College of Law Research Paper No. 479, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4003648 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4003648

Nancy A. McLaughlin (Contact Author)

University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law ( email )

332 South 1400 East, Rm 101
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0730
United States
801-581-5944 (Phone)
801-581-6897 (Fax)

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics