The Environmental Financial Advisory Board
      (EFAB), through its Strategic Action Agenda,
      previously has prepared a variety of reports
suggesting innovative  ways  to finance  EPA's
watershed protection programs.   This  work has
resulted in the following publications:

•  Recommendations  and Final  Report  on
   Opportunities for Financing the Clean Water
   Action Plan (July 1999)
•  Environmental   State   Revolving   Fund:
   Developing a Model to Expand the Scope of the
   SRF (June 2001)
•  Guidebook   of  Financial    Tools

The central premise of EPA's watershed work is that
the integrity of the land determines the integrity of our
nation's waters. This paper focuses on the concept of
stewardship as  an important means to protect and
restore America's land legacy in furtherance of EPA's
watershed approach.

The management and use of our public lands is
dictated by a long history of laws and regulations. The
management and use of the  private lands largely is
legislated by local  police powers  and  land use
authorities (zoning, conditional use permitting) although
federal and state laws (i.e., the Clean Water Act and
the Endangered Species Act) sometimes control uses
of private land, as well.  Moreover, the use of private
land is driven  by economic conditions and  market
prices:  specifically,  the availability of capital and
interest rates.

These laws and economic forces will continue to be
primary motivators concerning the use of real property
in America; however, they can be, and should be,
supplemented by the long-standing American value of
conservation  of  our  lands.    The  concept  of
stewardship—as an ethic and as a practice—can
give  strength and  cohesion to the conservation
movement, and can serve as an essential supplement
to our system of legal authorities and  economic

But what is stewardship and how can it be applied in
service of conserving our land legacy and protecting
our watersheds?

In Chapter 1,  we  set  forth  the  essence  of
stewardship, the principles to guide stewardship, and
a framework for planning a nationwide approach to

In Chapter 2, we explore an open-ended compilation
of policies and tools that support stewardship as an
ethic and that stimulate positive social responsibilities.

In Chapters, we explore an open-ended compilation
of policies,  tools,  and  incentives  that support
stewardship as a  practice and  that enable positive
economic and environmental outcomes.

In Chapter  4, we  explore  how the  acquisition of
various interests in the land may significantly support
stewardship efforts and provide substantial leverage to
funds available for acquisition investment.

2 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                           February 2003
In  Chapter  5,  we  offer  a  set  of  broad
recommendations  for  consideration   by  the
Administrator of EPA.

   Opportunity and Vision
   The Context of Land
   The Essence of Stewardship
   Principles for Stewardship
   Framework for Planning
   Stewardship as an Economic Enterprise

   Recognition and Rewards
   Partnerships and Cooperative Efforts
   Certification Systems
   Environmental Management Systems

   Cost Sharing Management Agreements
   Tax Incentives
   Federal Programs and Policies
   Loan Programs
   Mitigation Measures	
   Conservation Easements
   Transfer of Development Rights
   Transfer of Water Rights
   Life Estates and Remainder Interests



              CHAPTER 1


America is  experiencing  continuing  growth  in
population and prosperity.  The question of where
these people will live and work, and how their needs
for food, fiber, water, energy, affordable  housing,
urban infrastructure, transportation, and education will
be met, all bring into sharp focus the compelling need
to protect and conserve America's land base. At the
dawn of the 21st century there is a growing public
awareness that our continued prosperity depends on
the  integrity of our lands and the  habitats and
ecosystem services theyprovide. There is an inchoate
yearning for community, environmental quality, and
"quality of life."

Much of this interest  and   activism  about the
environmental integrity of  our  lands, habitats,
ecosystems, ecosystem services, and the sustainabiliry
of these resources for present and future generations

3 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                               February 2003
has been made manifest by the acquisition of lands for
permanent protection and conservation. Local and
regional land trusts, conservancies, and open space
districts are the primary players, along with national
land  trusts and state and federal land  and resource
management agencies. This mosaic of organizations
and  agencies, often working  in  concert,  has
accumulated an impressive portfolio of successes by
acquiring, managing, and conserving valuable lands.

But the acquisition of lands cannot, and should not, be
the only means to conserve our land legacy. While the
acquisition of lands must continue, we also need to
establish a framework to create a broader sense  of
responsibility, public and private, for land stewardship
and conservation.

We have an obligation to act now to conserve our
land  legacy  for the benefit  of present and  future
generations.  This opportunity is not open-ended. The
inexorable trends of continuing population growth,
expanding urban and suburban footprints, dispersed
development,  conversion  of  agricultural  lands,
fragmentation of lands, and the loss of habitats and
species diversity narrow the window of opportunity
every day. This calls for concerted action now, but
within the context of a long-term framework.

The purpose of this paper "Stewardship Policies,
Tools, and  Incentives to Protect and Restore
America's Land Legacy" is to set forth principles
and a broad policy framework, along with the tools
and incentives, to guide the long-term process  of
conserving our land legacy and  restoring the vital
functions that the lands may support.  It further sets
forth the strategic direction to instill the ethic and
practice of stewardship  on our public and private

We have now a compelling opportunity to create and
instill a land ethic - a stewardship ethic -  to guide the
protection and use of our lands. A stewardship ethic
is applicable to  the 70% of America that is held in
private ownership, as well as the holdings of public
lands. The private holdings in our urban, or urbanizing,
areas create essential economic product and sustain a
vital array of social values.   These lands  can be
developed and used pursuant  to a stewardship ethic
with responsible land use policies and practices. The
private holdings in rural areas can be characterized as
"working landscapes"--farms and croplands, ranches
and  pastures,  timber  operations  and   forests,
watersheds and fisheries-that comprise the mosaic of
our landscape, culture,  and economy.  These lands
also generate economic product. Moreover, they
include  viable  habitats, biodiversity,  functioning
ecosystems, and they provide ecosystem  services.
They provide open space and scenic vistas.  These
private lands are an essential part of America, and
properly managed by their owners with a  stewardship
ethic can produce lasting and sustainable value for all.

The  focus on the  integrity of the land inherently
incorporates the integrity of our nation's waters, air,
and climate—matters of direct and compelling interest
to the Environmental Protection Agency and the state
environmental programs. By embracing a stewardship
ethic  and working  to  develop and  implement
stewardship practices, EPA may significantly enhance
its mandated mission in support of growing public
values. It can enhance its regulatory and enforcement
agenda by supporting voluntary stewardship practices,
economic incentives, and other highly leveraged tools.
Stewardship practices  can  be the core means to
implement  the  watershed strategies  of the Clean
Water Action  Plan and to  develop  sustainable
financing systems to meet future needs for  clean
drinking water and wastewater treatment.

The opportunity to protect and conserve our "working
landscapes" must build upon the long-standing and

4 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                                February 2003
wide-ranging portfolio  of conservation programs
administered by the US Department of Agriculture.
These programs were first given specific direction and
significant funding in the Food Security Act of 1985.
Congress has recently  passed a new farm bill to
reauthorize the Food Security Act and to strengthen
agricultural lands  conservation  programs.   These
programs are especially noteworthy and compelling in
that they declare land conservation and stewardship
practices to be national policy.


The concept of land simply as real property needs to
be broadened considerably to encompass the view of
land as a natural resource, with its capacity to sustain
viable habitats,  biodiversity, functioning ecosystems,
and ecosystem services. Our vision of land should
include  land  as  "watersheds"  incorporating  the
fundamental  interdependence  of land  and  water
resources and the  expectation that land can provide
open space, scenic vistas, recreational opportunities,
and support spiritual values. Not all of these attributes
of land currently  are incorporated in our national
economic analysis of the value  of land,  yet  these
attributes are immensely valuable.

In advancing a  framework for land stewardship, one
must necessarily use the established language of real
property   ownership:   land-as-property,   public
ownership, private ownership. But our interest is not
focused on real property per se or even specific
ownership patterns; rather, our interest resides in the
ecological  values  of  the   land,  the  integrity of
watersheds, and the need to conserve our land legacy.
We need to expand our current truncated view of
land-as-property to a new view that all lands, public
and private, have inherent value as natural resources,
as natural capital,  and as signature elements of the

Continued   prosperity  depends on our ability to
protect the resources of our natural heritage and to
learn to live in ways that do not unduly diminish the
land; indeed, we can develop and use our land in
ways  that   nurture,  enhance,  and   sustain  it.
Stewardship  is  at  the core  of this  obligation.
Stewardship calls upon every one in society to assume
responsibility for protecting the  integrity of natural
resources and  ecosystems and, in  so doing, to
safeguard the interests of future generations. Without
personal and collective commitment, without an ethic
based on acceptance of personal responsibility, efforts
to   sustain   natural  resources  protection   and
environmental quality cannot be fully successful.
  "A conservation ethic is that which aims to pass on
  to future generations the best part of the non-human
  world. To know this world is to gain a proprietary
  attachment to it. To know it well is to love and take
  responsibility for it."

  Edward O. Wilson
  The Future of Life
In its  traditional  usage, stewardship  referred to
administering land  on behalf of others.  In our more
current usage, stewardship is  about caring for and
conserving land on behalf of current and  future
generations. Stewardship is  defined as an ethic of
respect for the  inherent values of healthy  natural
systems and as a practice that sustains those benefits
for current and future generations.

Stewardship is therefore embodied as both an ethic
(a set of beliefs)  and as  a  practice (a set of
behaviors).   The  ethical and practical aspects of
stewardship operate to  reinforce each other; the ethic
informs the practice; the practice enriches the ethic.

1.     Stewardship as an Ethic

5 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                               February 2003
The stewardship ethic seeks to conserve land and
sustain and enhance natural systems for the benefit of
succeeding generations.  Stewardship  is a  set of
beliefs or  values  shaped by  information from a
multiplicity of cultures, disciplines, and other sources.
A stewardship  ethic  can be embraced by various
entities: an individual, an enterprise, a community, or
a governmental agency.

2.     Stewardship as a Practice

The practice of stewardship is a voluntary endeavor
on the part of the landowner. It is shaped by many
factors: prevailing laws, regulations,  and  codes;
economic  policies  and  market forces; and societal
values.  Stewardship practices may also be  "best
management practices." Stewardship practices  are
encouraged and supported by information, education
and applied knowledge, recognition and rewards,
technical assistance  and peer  review, financial
incentives, tax policies, public investment policies, and
governmental assurances.


A framework for stewardship should be  guided by a
set  of higher order principles  that promote the
common good and that all of society can support.
These principles  should guide  the planning  and
decision-making   process   for  land  use   and
conservation,  and  should contribute to a sense of
fairness, equity, and common purpose.

Respect property rights

The use and enjoyment of private property, private
resources, and private rights should be respected. In
the United States, private property is both protected
and regulated to achieve objectives of the larger public
interest.  This balance of protection and regulation is
essential to the legal integrity of land conservation

Use best available science

Planning  and   decision-making  regarding  land
conservation and stewardship should be informed by,
and reflect, best available science.

Respect the rule of law

Laws and regulations affecting the use of lands and
their resources should be respected  and equitably
enforced.    However,   we  should  work  with
governments  to  identify  and  change  laws  and
regulations that discourage stewardship.

Avoid conflicts

Planning and land regulation should seek to avoid or
prevent  conflicts between human habitation patterns
and natural processes and functions such as seasonal
flooding and regenerative fire.

Employ economic efficiency tools and market

Efficient  economic utilization of lands,  within the
established footprints ofurban/suburban extent, should
be the foundation of public land use policy in support
of stewardship.

Positive incentives (financial as well as non-financial
such as regulatory and permitting reforms) should be
created,  pursued,  and  aligned in support  of
stewardship  practices,  with  comparable attention
given to the removal of disincentives and barriers.

6 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                               February 2003
A "willing seller" should always be  preferred in a
public  acquisition; with  land  valuation based  on
considerations of fair market value and comparable
land values that prevail in the local market at a given

Apply the power of partnerships

Partnering efforts among public lands managers at the
federal,  state,  and  local levels, private owners and
operators, private land trusts, land conservancies, and
philanthropic organizations should be fully engaged to
gain leverage  and to lend  collective  power  to
conservation efforts. Peer review techniques, sharing
of knowledge  and best practices should be widely

Create multiple benefits

Multiple  benefits  in the land should  be sought
wherever possible;  including  habitat  protection,
ecological services, agricultural productivity, source
water protection, public safety, flood control, historical
and  archeological   protection,   recreational
opportunities, and open space and aesthetic values.

The integrity of the land itself (soil mantle, soil tilth,
fertility, and vegetative cover) should receive priority
consideration for protection and conservation.

The integrity of watershed lands should be protected
and maintained, and where necessary restored,  to
ensure the quantity and quality of surface waters and
groundwater to provide essential present and future
water supplies. Watershed-based source protection
should be a priority to enable America to minimize the
costs of downstream drinking water treatment.

Watercourses, riparian zones and  wetlands should
receive special protection due to their value for water
quality enhancement,  fishery  production,   habitat,
aquatic   and  terrestrial   diversity,   runoff  water
conveyance, and flood water detention.

Lands protected and conserved in public ownership,
wherever appropriate and feasible, should provide
access for  public use and enjoyment. Public lands
should be used  appropriately for the education of
school children and the general public.  Certain lands,
such as wildlife refuges, may warrant use limitations to
protect resources. Conservation easements held in
public ownership may have public access restricted to
respect adjacent private interests.

Seek and utilize local advice and experience

Whenever possible, the active support, knowledge,
experience, and cooperation of people  who live in and
around important natural areas should be secured to
improve the chances  of successful land conservation

Enabling people to "stay on the land" as stewards and
responsible  owners  and operators  of working
landscapes  should be  encouraged and supported
wherever appropriate.

Consider an ecological scale

Adjacent lands, both public and private, should be
aligned  and "linked" wherever feasible to create
protected wildlife corridors and seasonal habitat.

Adjacent lands, both public and private, should be
managed and protected wherever possible within an
appropriate landscape scale  to  enable  ecological
processes to operate and where natural dynamics can
help assure the maintenance of long-term ecological

Apply a sense of heritage

7 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                                February 2003
The practice of stewardship to conserve our public
and private lands should be consciously applied for the
benefit of future Americans - their heritage is the land
legacy we bequeath to them.

Assertive action today to conserve America's finite
lands should preserve options and opportunities for


A long-term planning framework, incorporating the
principles above, should be  developed within the
context of the host of policies and considerations that
shape America's landscape. A national stewardship
policy could be framed within existing consideration

•  Regulation of the use of private lands
•   Stewardship of private lands
•   Stewardship of public lands
•  Acquisition of private lands and easements

1.     Regulation of the Use of Private Lands

Public regulation of private lands is an important policy
tool to promote the ethic and practice of stewardship.
A planning framework for land conservation  should
align with, and build upon, the existing system of
public regulation of the use of private lands.

The use of private lands is governed by a panoply of
laws and  regulations: local authorities (zoning, use
permits, codes); state land  use and planning codes
(Subdivision   Map  Act):   federal   and   state
environmental rules (wetlands protection, storm water
runoff); and federal laws (Endangered Species Act).
The   regulatory   system  can   encourage   land
conservation and the management of natural resources
while creating economic  benefits.   The regulatory
system can also discourage or even prohibit the loss of
important and valuable habitats such as the regulation
that prohibits the filling of wetlands. It is essential that
regulations  be   coordinated   across  adjacent
jurisdictions to reinforce a regional planning template.
It is also important to seek the appropriate balance
between regulatory  oversight  and the  ability  of
landowners to utilize their land for their purposes.

Regulation  of land  use  through zoning  (often
complemented by a program of civic action and  local
expenditures) can effectively create open space and
enhance habitat values; witness the greenways, urban
creeks, riparian zones, wetlands,  buffer zones, and
parks that enhance the urban environment and create
habitat opportunities.  The combination of regulation
and local public investment has considerable power
and potential.

The regulatory system, with its complex statutory
requirements and often duplicative and conflicting
rules,  is in need of modernization and reform to more
effectively  promote the  ethic  and  practice  of
stewardship. Regulatory  action by each of many
regulators can present a formidable barrier to those
landowners   seeking  to   implement   stewardship
practices.   Streamlined regulatory reviews, while
honoring  the  statutory intent, can greatly assist
landowners  willing  to exercise conservation  and
stewardship  on their lands. Coordinated regulatory
reviews  for  restoration  and  environmental
enhancement  projects  should become  common

2.      Stewardship of Private Lands

Roughly 70% of the land base in America is  held in
private ownership.   We need to acknowledge the
many private landowners  and  families across the
country that have practiced good stewardship of their
lands.  Stewardship  has been accomplished despite
formidable  economic  barriers.    Still,  there  is
considerable untapped potential to engage the private
sector in the long-term enterprise  of conserving our

8 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                                February 2003
land legacy. A means to this end is to instill within all
landowners the ethic and practice of stewardship of
private lands.

In the regulatory and enforcement culture of America,
stewardship has been largely discounted as a land
conservation policy.  However, there is power in the
passion of individuals and communities for conserving
lands.  In order to mobilize this passion to conserve
lands, private landowners must be treated fairly. We
should not expect current landowners alone to redress
the mistakes of the past, nor should they be expected
to  carry the full burden of providing for  future
generations.  We must not expect landowners to
absorb the  full costs of measures that  create public
benefits (e.g. managing their land to  sustain  robust
habitats, dedicating their land to wildlife corridors and
vital habitat linkages, or foregoing development to
sustain open space and scenic vistas.)

Private stewardship of private  lands  should  be
supported  by an  array of tools, incentives, and
methods. Specifically, the full set of positive financial
incentives and tax policies should be utilized. Just as
important, barriers and disincentives to stewardship of
private land should be removed.  A just and reliable
measure of economic and regulatory certainty should
be assured  to landowners acting as good stewards.

Ultimately,  the ethic and practice of stewardship of
private lands  is  a joint public-private enterprise.
Private landowners, as stewards, manage and care for
their lands to create long-term public benefits. Public
resources are deployed in support of,  and  in partial
compensation for,  private  stewardship practices.
Working together,  America's land  legacy may be
effectively conserved.
3. Stewardship of Public Lands

 Roughly 30% of the land base in America is held in
public ownership.  This fraction will  incrementally
increase  as  a  result  of  continuing active  land
acquisition programs.  These public  lands  largely
consist of federal holdings such as national forests (in
the mountain  regions) and public domain (in the
deserts), along with national parks, state parks, local
parks, and open space holdings.

Lands currently held in public ownership and managed
in the  public  interest should receive quality care,
infused with the best practices of stewardship and
informed by the best available science. Substantial
deferred  maintenance and  unmet needs  are  now
evident  on our  public  lands.    Restoration  of
diminished, damaged, or lost natural resources should
become an investment priority sustained over the long
term to heal the damage and restore the functions and
values of these lands and their habitats.

In planning new  land  acquisitions, a reasonable
provision for any necessary restoration and long term
care and  stewardship should be  included  in  the
investment decision.

4. Acquisition of Private Lands and Easements

Acquisition maybe the most familiartactic to conserve
lands, although it is not the only one or sometimes the
best one.  However, it is a very powerful and critical
instrument in the overall strategy for land conservation.

Acquisition in fee  simple absolute secures full title of
real property, usually in public ownership as a unit of
a park, reserve, open space, forest, etc.   This can
assure  permanent protection and  public access.
However, it often comes with an imbedded economic
obligation for maintenance and restoration.  Due to the
extraordinary  initial cost,  usually only top priority
lands, critical  habitats, and/or "once  in  a lifetime
opportunity"   properties   can  be  protected  by

Acquisition in fee simple increasingly is giving way to
purchase a partial interest in  a property,  such as  a

9 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                                February 2003
conservation easement, development right, watertight,
or greenway easement. Less-than-full-fee acquisition
can be very cost-effective.  It can eliminate  the
development potential (and development value) from
the land  leaving  the underlying  land in  private
ownership and care, but furthering the opportunity to
develop and sustain working landscapes. Also, and
very importantly, the income from the sale of the
easement can help landowners pay debts, modernize
for efficiency,  and improve their land  for the next

Lands initially acquired are often re-sold to a party
who  will  practice  stewardship  while  maintaining
economic  production as a working landscape.  The
resale  agreement  often  includes   a   management
obligation, imbedded in the deed, for the continuing
stewardship of the land.   And, of course, the resale
proceeds replenish capital that can be used for other
acquisition investments.

There  is a strong tradition of private giving through
philanthropy where private wealth is transferred or
bequeathed to  a  public entity  or  to a non-
governmental organization (NGO)  for  stewardship
purposes.  The gift is often land. Sometimes liquid
assets are transferred; these funds  can be used to
acquire new lands.   These transactions are often
motivated in part by tax considerations. A strategy for
land conservation should  incorporate this tradition,
and enhance it with specific changes to the tax code.
Facilitating the transfer of lands (or liquid assets  for
land) for the protection of land conservation is in the
public interest and is, therefore, an appropriate  subject
of tax policy.

There is a growing appreciation that the practice of
stewardship yields considerable economic value. This
economic value is often indirectly manifested as
"costs avoided", but the value may also be accounted
for directly. Where there is economic value, there are
opportunities to enhance, finance, and leverage such
values for even greater economic and social  good.
Environmental financing techniques are being explored
in association with the  compendium of tools and
incentives examined in Chapter 3 of this report.

Of primary  interest  to  EPA, the  practice   of
stewardship yields an impressive  ledger of "costs
avoided"  in  the  watershed-based  water quality
protection programs.   The integrity  of the watershed
lands determines  the  integrity of the waters.  The
application of good stewardship practices to the land
should result in the prevention of soil erosion and  the
reduction of runoff of nutrients and pesticides from
cultivated  lands   or  rangelands.   Reduction   or
prevention of the  pollution loadings to steams and
rivers directly reduces or avoids the costs of needed
treatment for after-the-fact cleanup. These  costs  of
cleanup—regulatory and compliance costs, capital
investments, operations expenditures, and restoration
costs—are significant.  To the  extent they can  be
avoided or minimized,  society will benefit.

In like manner, the practice of stewardship can protect
the ability of  ecosystems to perform their vital
functions and to preserve and protect the economic
values  presented by  these  "ecosystem services."
Ecosystems provide a range of "services" that are just
beginning to be  understood:   climate regulation,
production of clean source waters for drinking, storm
water retention and  water  quality enhancement
(through wetlands and marshes), the production of
food,  fodder  and   fiber,  the  production   of
pharmaceutical  chemicals, biodiversity, etc.  These
"ecosystem  services"  are  provided  by nature
essentially for free. For mankind to  replicate such
services would  entail  untold costs  (if it were even
possible). The practice of stewardship  of our lands
and  waters  is  an important  feature of protecting

10 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                               February 2003
ecosystem services, and therefore presents immense
value to  society.  Research is underway to more
thoroughly document the value of ecosystem services
and to develop financial instruments and incentives to
insure their protection.

The  practice of  stewardship  can directly create
significant value in economic  and environmental
benefits, as well as cultural and spiritual rewards. The
practice of stewardship can result in:
       Enhanced property values
       Increased productivity of the land or natural
       resource asset
•      Improved bottom-line performance
       Improved financial ratings  and shareholder
•      Enhanced value in watershed integrity, water
       availability, water purity
       Enhanced value in habitats and biodiversity
•      Enhanced  value   in   functioning   robust
•      Increased numbers of "best practices" that are
       friendlier to our lands
       Enhanced quality offarmlands to be passed to
       future generations
•      Enhanced  quality of  life  through  spiritual
       connectedness to the land.

In summary, the  practice  of stewardship yields
economic  value in "costs avoided",  and produces
direct values and benefits to  both the public and
private sectors.  The growing  portfolio of tools and
incentives to promote the ethic  and  practice  of
stewardship, along with the dedication of substantial
public  and  private funding,  will  certainly attract
financing mechanisms to enhance and leverage these
investments for  greater social  good. The traditional
expenditures of one-time  appropriations to  support
these incentives will give  way to new concepts of
sustainable investment and environmental finance.
                CHAPTER 2

This chapter  is intended to  be an  open-ended
compilation  of possible  tools, methods,  and
incentives that can be useful to help implement
stewardship  practices.   Most  of  these  tools
currently exist and are utilized across the country.
New  tools  are  being  developed  and  tested
continually by innovative stewards; therefore, the
tools presented here likely will change over time.

The ethic and practice of stewardship  requires an
information-rich   environment.     Effective
communication   of  information   can  impact
perspectives,  behavior,  practices, and decision-
making.  To enable private landowners to manage
their land as stewards, information should be available
•      Inform owners about natural resources  and
       valuable ecological sites and habitats on their
       property,  including  the  presence  of
       endangered species;
       Inform owners  about methods available to
       protect, enhance,  manage, and/or  conserve
       such resources and enhance ecological values
       on the property;
       Enable owners to find competent advice  and
       technical assistance;
•      Enable owners  to locate  available financial
       assistance,  including cost-sharing programs,
       low interest loans, grants, etc.;
•      Inform owners how to form partnerships with
       governmental agencies and NGOs;
       Inform owners about how private property
       can be held, conserved, and transferred to
       heirs in a stewardship-friendly manner.

11 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                               February 2003
Stewardship  information  must be  carefully  and
purposefully  assembled, packaged,  targeted,  and
presented. The delivery mechanism of the information
must be considered as carefully as the message itself.
The messenger is often just as important as the
message itself.  The usual practice of "getting the word
out" needs to be supplemented by "getting the word
in". Locally based peer groups and open engagement
of neighbors can often be more effective than outside

Thoughtful  communication  will build trust among
stewards and their communities, rally people around
a common cause and encourage local ownership of
stewardship proj ects. The tenor of discussions about
stewardship must move from blame to responsibility.


Of all the resources available to sustain the future of
humankind,  information is  the   only   one   that
systematically increases over time.  The profusion of
information about  stewardship should be synthesized
and delivered as an educational program to instill an
ethic of stewardship.

The objectives of such an education program are:

       To increase basic literacy about stewardship;
       To instill in all our citizens an appreciation of
       the history, culture, tradition of our lands;
•      To develop individual awareness  of -  and
       responsibility for - the  integrity of natural
       resources and ecological processes;
•      To strengthen   and enrich  the  scientific
       underpinnings  of   our  understanding  of
       ecological systems.

Education about stewardship of our lands must begin
early in our nation's  schools. While it is important to
educate current landowners, including public, private,
individual and business owners, about stewardship of
the lands they own,  the landowners and business
executives of tomorrow are in classrooms today - not
only in our elementary and high school classrooms but
in our college and graduate programs as well.  Many
schools include stewardship in their curriculum.  All
schools should be encouraged to teach stewardship at
every level.

Such environmental literacy programs will produce
enormous  benefits  over time.   In the course of a
generation, we can instill the  ethic and practice of
stewardship as a normative standard for individual and
enterprise behavior.


The  ethic  and  practice  of stewardship  can be
advanced by the use of recognition and rewards. Any
individual or enterprise that implements stewardship
practices ought to enjoy the recognition and support
of their peers and community.  Certain rewards are
financial and  manifest at the bottom-line; but peer
recognition of individual  responsibility is a most
powerful incentive that reinforces the prevailing social
value and  ethic of stewardship, as  well.   A
proliferation of recognition and rewards  currently
exist. They simply need to be employed to specifically
recognize exemplary stewardship practices.


Individual efforts to  practice  stewardship can be
significantly  enhanced   by   cooperation  and
collaboration with others in a joint endeavor.  These
alliances should  be encouraged and supported to
create   viable  partnerships   working  toward
stewardship goals.  Partnerships also can further the
goal to educate about stewardship and create a "ripple
effect" of individuals or entities that then may be willing
to partner  with others who might be reluctant to
undertake a project alone.

12 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                               February 2003
1.     Cooperatives

Increasingly landowners, farmers, ranchers, and others
are organizing themselves into cooperative groups in
an alliance with regulatory authorities, NGO's, and
academics in order to promote land management and
stewardship  practices.   The advantages of these
associations  are  that participants receive technical
assistance, information, peer support, and a network
of people to work with as they change from traditional
practices to new stewardship practices.

A prime example of this trend is the shift to increased
use of biologically based farming techniques and the
integration of these practices with natural resources
management  and   wildlife  conservation   efforts.
Specific  organizations  have  emerged:  California
Certified Organic  Farmers  (CCOF);  Community
Alliance of Family Farmers (CAFF); Biologically
Integrated Orchard Systems (BIOS);  Biologically
Integrated Farming Systems (BIFS).  These types of
cooperatives/associations  can  create  some
comprehensive alignment-of-intereststo systematically
support a stewardship ethic.

The Western Governors Association (WGA), through
its ongoing activities in  support of management of
western  lands,  has  formed  many   noteworthy
partnerships and  cooperative ventures.  The States,
the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS),  Local  Resource Conservation Districts
(RCD), and  various  partners-in-conservation  are
actively working  to promote the implementation of
new approaches to private land conservation in the

2.     Natural Community Conservation
       Planning (NCCP)

NCCP organizations promote a new  cooperative
approach to stewardship and ecosystem management
(especially  for  endangered  species)  that  brings
together developers, NGO's, and various levels of
governmental regulatory authorities  in  a  problem
solving collaborative.

An NCCP focuses on whole natural communities,
rather than reacting to conservation problems on a
project-by-project or species-by-species basis. This
approach encourages the protection of hundreds of
species by thousands of landowners at a time. In San
Diego County, for example, the NCCP will serve as
a blueprint that will ultimately result in the protection
and restoration  of some 172,000 acres of native
habitats that are home to  more than 85 rare and
endangered species.  The  preserve system will be
assembled from existing public land, properties set
aside as part of the land development process, and the
acquisition of private lands by local, state, and federal
groups and agencies. This San Diego NCCP is of
true historic proportions because it marks the first time
that stewardship and conservation values, instead of
development desires, have drivena local land-use plan
of such size and scope.
Watershed Councils
Watershed councils in various forms and with various
purposes have emerged as mechanism to facilitate
locally place-based ecosystem conservation. These
may be  private nonprofit organizations,  but  they
usually   take   the   form   of  multi-stakeholder
organizations with diverse governing boards that can
involve environmentalists, ranchers, farmers, business
interests, and representatives from local,  state, and
federal resource agencies.  While the success  of
watershed councils  often depends on funding and
some dedicated staffing, they have great potential to
promote the ethic and practice of stewardship within
their watersheds.


13 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                               February 2003
Difficult  environmental  disputes  created   by
development proposals and the needs of endangered
species, or those involving substantial tradeoffs in
environmental values and economic costs, increasingly
are being resolved by means of mediation by neutral
third parties. Mediation can encourage the parties to
commit to protect resources; negotiate land exchanges
and  easements; modify  rules; and educate other
landowners in the merits of stewardship practices.
The agreements are often voluntary, but can also be
structured as binding.  The  most notable example of
this approach is the historic New York City watershed
agreement: the City agreed  to manage the public and
private lands in the watershed of the City's reservoirs
to protect the  quality  of  the source waters; the
Environmental Protection Agency agreed to suspend
the requirements for expensive  filtration treatment of
the City's water supply.  Water  quality is assured,
substantial costs are avoided, and the watershed will
be managed for long-term stewardship.


The  ethic  and  practice of  stewardship  can  be
supported substantially by a new evolving system of
certifications.  The certification is  a "warranty" to
consumers that a product, and/or the manner in which
a product is produced, honors established criteria
reflecting good stewardship  practices.  Certifications
are often subject to third party audits and /or oversight
of a  certification council such   as  the Forest
Stewardship Council, Organic Foods Council, Marine
Stewardship Council.   Certification  affords  an
economic and market advantage to those practicing
stewardship in that it directly shapes consumer-buying

              SYSTEMS (EMS)

Enterprises that engage in a comprehensive internal
audit and assessment  of their production processes
(i.e., an Environmental Management System modeled
on ISO 14000 series or other suitable template) may
be able  to  determine  appropriate practices  of
stewardship  for  each step of  their  operations.
Seemingly minor improvements can accumulate over
time and make a substantial contribution to an overall
practice  of stewardship,  as well as  support the
concept  that stewardship makes "good business
sense." The power of an EMS is enhanced by the use
of third party auditors and formal certification, and full
transparency to enable accountability and trust.

                CHAPTER 3

This chapter is intended  to be an open-ended
compilation of tools, methods, and incentives that
can be  useful to help  implement stewardship
practices.  Most of these tools currently exist and
are utilized across the country.  New tools are
being  developed  and  tested  continually  by
innovative stewards; therefore, the tools presented
here likely will change over time.


Private landowners who wish to conserve their land
and apply stewardship practices may voluntarily enter
into a  cost-sharing management agreement with  a
government  resource   agency.     Management
agreements contain structured economic incentives to
support and  reward the  landowner's stewardship

Many of these economic incentives are derived from
agricultural policy set forth in a series of progressive
federal legislative  measures  (characterized here  as
"Farm Bills"). The Farm Bills contain the essence of
stewardship: they ensure the long term environmental

14 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                               February 2003
health and productivity of the land; keep farmers,
ranchers, and  foresters on the  land; and provide
financial assistance to private land  owners as they
work to create public benefits.

The accumulated experience over the last 15 years in
implementing the Farm Bills reveals  an extraordinary
(and  often  unrecognized)  success   story  for
conservation and stewardship.   The  Nation  has
benefitted by decreased soil erosion, protected and
restored wetlands, wildlife habitats,  improved water
quality, and absorption of excess carbon from the air,
all  while  sustaining working  landscapes  and
maintaining viable livelihoods.

Management agreements are based on models of cost
sharing.  Public funds are  proffered in  response to
private matching or cost-sharing formulas; private land
thereby is used to create public benefit. As such, cost-
sharing mechanisms convey a sense of public-private
shared responsibility  and mutual benefit. Moreover,
the cost sharing  and matching  provisions  enable
substantial leverage to be obtained  from the public

Various  programs exist, as authorized by the  Farm
Bills, and some are described generally below.

1.     Conservation Reserve Program (CRP)

The  Conservation Reserve Program, enacted  in the
1985 Farm Bill, provides annual rental  payments to
farmers  who  voluntarily  remove  cropland from
production  on   highly   erodible  or   otherwise
environmental sensitive terrain and plant a cover crop
of grasses or trees for a minimum period of 10  years.
In addition, the farmer must complete,  with a 50%
cost-share, certain conservationmeasures over the life
of the contract. The annual rental payments are based
on a bidding process to determine the  payment for
taking land out of production; the maximum  rental
payment is $50,000  per person, per year.  Rental
payments are not counted against payment limitations
applicable to commodity price support and production
adjustment programs. Once enrolled, the land cannot
be farmed for the duration of the contract (usually 10

Amendments to the  1990 Farm Bill  added a new
program designed to improve water  quality by
encouraging landowners  to establish buffers on
croplands to reduce the nutrients and chemicals that
flow from the farms into water courses. Farmers who
create such buffers may receive 50%  cost share as
well as annual rental payments.

In addition to the economic  incentives discussed
above, the  1985  Farm  Bill also  introduced  new
provisions for  Highly Erodible Lands (HEL). The
Conservation Compliance and "Sodbuster" programs
establish a disincentive for producers to cultivate land
that is classified as highly erodible. The producer must
develop and fully implement a soil conservation plan
or suffer the  loss of eligibility  for  farm  support

2.     Conservation Reserve Enhanced
       Program (CREP)

Under the 1996 Farm bill, the Federal Conservation
Reserve Enhanced Program can be combined with an
approved  state program.   The  federal program
described above is augmented by state matching funds
(usually 20%) to create permanent easements and to
help pay for planning and natural resources restoration
costs. The primary purpose of the enhanced program
is to help landowners create riparian buffers of trees
and grasses along watercourses to provide habitats
and to filter pollutants to improve water quality. The
total amount of funds available varies by state, but
these funds provide a  compelling  incentive  for

3.     Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP)

15 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                               February 2003
The  WRP, enacted in the  1990 Farm Bill, is  a
voluntary   incentive-based  program  offering
landowners the opportunity to protect, enhance, and
restore wetlands on their property. The focus is on
restoration of farmed/prior-converted wetlands, and
protection of the functions and values of wetlands to
improve   water  quality,   floodwater  retention,
groundwater  recharge,   and   wildlife  habitat.
Landowners can select from three enrollment options:
permanent easements where landowners can receive
up to full agricultural value of the land and the entire
cost of restoration; 30 year easements with payments
of 75% of value and 75% of restoration costs; or 10
year agreements with 75% of restoration  costs.
Beyond these  payments,   landowners  can  often
supplement their income by leasing the restored
wetlands for hunting, fishing, and other  appropriate
recreational uses.

In addition to the above incentives, the 1985 Farm Bill
introduced the "Swampbuster"  program that is  a
disincentive  to  draining wetlands for agricultural
production. Landowners who receive farm subsidies,
loans, or  benefits  must refrain  from  drainage  of
wetlands or risk losing their program  funds and
practices and is reimbursed for  50-70% of those

5.     Wildlife  Habitat  Incentives  Program

The WHIP, enacted in the 1996 Farm Bill, is a
voluntary program for private landowners who want
to establish and improve fish and wildlife habitat on
their lands.  Participants agree to implement a wildlife
habitat conservation plan in return for financial and
technical assistance.   Although federal  cost-share
payments are limited to $10,000 per contract, these
dollars have been leveraged many times over with
contributions  from  state  wildlife  agencies, local
conservancies, and private funds.

6.     Forest Stewardship Program (FSP)

The FSP, enacted in the  1990 Farm Bill,  enables
landowners to receive up to 75% of the costs  of
preparing and implementing a Forest Stewardship
Plan to protect and enhance their forested land and
associated watersheds. The plans are intended to
promote stewardship of the  forest cover, as well as
fish and wildlife habitat, water quality, and recreational
and aesthetic values of the land.
4.     Environmental Quality Incentives
       Program (EQIP)

EQIP, enacted in the 1996 Farm Bill, offers financial,
educational, and technical assistance to landowners to
implement livestock-related conservation practices,
on-farm conservation measures to reduce soil loss,
and control of non-point sources of water pollution.
This program advances  the  concepts of private
stewardship of the land for livestock operations, and
includes  grazing   land   management,   nutrient
management, and manure management from confined
animal feeding operations. The landowner pays the
initial cost  of establishing approved conservation
              TAX INCENTIVES

The  tax  code provides  a variety of benefits and
incentives to those who wish to pursue stewardship
practices.  Tax  codes and tax policy can be  an
efficient means to change behavior, create incentives
or disincentives for stewardship, and to alter patterns
of natural  resources  utilization.    The  following
examples provide a few illustrations.
Ad Valorum Taxation
Lands appraised for property taxes atthe "highest and
best use" can impose upward pressure on land values

16 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                                                                               February 2003
and therefore increase the incentive to convert open
space land (or working landscapes) to development
uses. To offset this problem, property tax stabilization
or "current use" programs  have been  enacted  in
several states to provide an economic incentive to
maintain  farms,  ranches, forest  and  open  space.
Based on criteria (usually including some measure of
ecological value), property tax burdens are lowered in
return for commitments by the owner for stewardship
and  maintenance  of the  integrity  of the  land.
Management agreements (see above) maybe used to
ensure the property serves its intended purpose.

In California, the Williamson Act  (California Land
Conservation Act of 1965) is an example  of this type
of property tax  stabilization program for farmland.
Landowners enroll their property with the county for
a  minimum of  10  years (which  is  automatically
extended in one-year increments).  In exchange, the
land continues  to  be   assessed  for  agricultural
production resulting in substantial tax savings.  If land
is withdrawn prematurely from the  Williamson Act,
significant tax penalties may accrue.  An estimated  16
million acres are  currently enrolled under  Williamson
Act provisions.
Estate Taxation
Properties that have high market values but low-
income production may cause heirs to face formidable
estate tax  consequences  upon  the death of the
landowner.  Current tax law can create a situation
where these properties (often with high habitat/open
space value) must be sold  or  subdivided to pay the
estate taxes due.  The Economic Growth and Tax
Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 may substantially
reduce the likelihood that estate taxes will cause the
sale or subdivision of properties. The new law raises
the amounts that can be  exempted from taxation
($675,000 in 2001; $1.0 million in 2002; $1.5 million
in 2004;  $2.0  million in 2006; $3.5 million in 2009).
Moreover, the top estate tax rate, now set at 55%,
                                               will drop to 50% in 2002 and decrease 1% per year
                                               to 45% in 2007. These changes, in combination with
                                               other  estate  planning provisions, now will be  a
                                               powerful incentive to retain the integrity of larger tracts
                                               of land and facilitate the continued stewardship of such

                                               3.     Charitable Donations  of Lands  -  Tax

                                               Existing  state  and  federal tax  codes allow tax
                                               deductions for charitable donations ofland; individuals
                                               generally can deductup to 3 0 percent of their adjusted
                                               gross income and corporations can deduct up to 10
                                               percent of taxable income. Deductions are based on
                                               fair market value of the property, including certain
                                               appreciated values. These tax deductions can serve
                                               as a powerful incentive for land stewards to donate
                                               private property for charitable/conservation purposes.
       Donations of Lands - Tax Credit
In California, The Natural Heritage Preservation Tax
Credit Act of 2000 (SB 1647) provides that lands
with specified  natural resource upon them may be
donated  to the  State  of  California,  any  local
government, or a designated nonprofit organization.
The donation provides for the protection of wildlife
habitat, open space and parklands, and agricultural
lands.  The Act allows a 55%  tax  credit against
income and/or corporation taxes for the donation of
such properties.  This tax  credit can reduce regular
taxes below the threshold for alternative minimum tax
calculation. Excess credits  can be carried forward for
seven years. The tax credit is in lieu of any other tax
deductions (see above) that may be available for the
donation.  The Act sets a limit that no more than $ 100
million be expended for tax credits over the next  5
years. This tax credit will be a powerful incentive for
land  stewards  to  donate  their   property   for
conservation purposes.

17 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                                                                              February 2003
5.     Taxable Capital Gains

Landowners  who  sell their  land  (or  a qualified
easement) for conservation purposes could have their
taxable capital  gain  on the  sale reduced.  Such  a
reduction of taxable capital gain would increase the
likelihood  that   such lands  would  be  sold  for
conservation  rather  than for  development.   The
reduced capital gain from the conservation sale would
enable the seller to benefit from larger net proceeds
after taxes.
Real Estate Transfer Taxes
Based on local housing market conditions and the
general appreciation of real estate value, the market
prices of urban land and dwellings, and the market
prices of undeveloped urban-edge lands, can increase
substantially over  time.  The  State  of  Maryland,
through its Smart Growth Program,  is seeking to
capture the increased value of urban lands and to
transfer some  of that  increment of value to the
preservation of rural lands. A real estate transfer tax
is assessed (.05% of transaction value) on the sale of
urban property.  Revenues are then applied to: 1)
directly purchase rural/open lands in fee  simple; 2)
directly purchase development rights or conservation
easements; and, 3) to leverage a new issuance of state
general obligation bonds to acquire open lands for
land preservation and conservation management.
Charitable Remainder Unitrust
The  tax  code contains  provisions that  enable an
individual or  a  couple to indirectly promote lands
conservation and stewardship through an instrument
known as a Charitable Remainder Unitrust (CRUT).
Individuals or couples (the "Trustors") can establish a
CRUT and then transfer liquid assets (usually stock
with substantial appreciated value) to the CRUT.  The
CRUT remains in effect for the lifetime of the Trustors
or the survivor of them, at which time its accumulated
asset value is transferred to a designated non-profit
land trust conservancy to be  reinvested or used to
purchase lands and/or easements for conservation

The tax advantages are compelling and benefit both
the Trustors and their estates, and, importantly, benefit
the public interest in lands' conservation.

1.  The Trustors receive a specified level (x%  of
    current asset value)  of income from the CRUT
    each year for their lifetime. The income is largely
    derived from capital  appreciation in the CRUT,
    and so is treated by the Trustors as capital gain at
    lower tax  rates then the  rates on their earned

2.  The Trustors may claim  a current income tax
    deduction  for the proper %  of value that is
    donated to the charitable trust (the CRUT).  This
    deduction, of course, can be applied against their
    other current income to reduce the tax burden.

3.  The Trustor' s residual estate does not contain any
    of the assets donated to the CRUT; and so estate
    taxation is reduced accordingly.

4.  The Trustors ultimately pay no capital gain on the
    appreciated stock that they originally put into the

5.  The  CRUT  itself is tax-exempt,  and  so the
    accumulating/appreciating assets in the  CRUT
    incur no capital gain tax at all.  The Trustors in
    effect have transferred  substantially appreciated
    value, and further  accumulated  value  in the
    CRUT, to the benefit  of land conservation without
    incurring capital gains.

6.  The land conservancy, which receives the full tax-
    free  value of the CRUT at the  time  of the
    Trustor's death, gains a substantial asset, which

18 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                                February 2003
    can then be invested in lands conservation and
    stewardship programs.


Federal policies governing the use of public lands and
resources,  federal  fees, and  federal  funding  for
infrastructures could be used to support a variety of
stewardship practices.

1.  Federal Water for Habitat

Federal water (i.e., water resources developed under
a  federal  water   project)  has  traditionally been
allocated free-of-charge to benefit the aquatic habitat
values of federally designated refuges.  Even though
such water is often surplus and is applied in the off-
season (when  irrigation water is not  otherwise
needed), it provides essential habitats for migrating
control benefits of the non-structural flood control
measures created exceed the benefits provided by
structural works. The non-structural measures could
include direct purchase of lands in the flood plain;
relocation of urban  settlements to higher ground;
purchase of flood easements or right-of-way; levee
set-backs; re-creation of riparian/wetlands habitats to
provide flood water detention and absorption.

Moreover,  federal funds  allocated by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for flood
disaster relief and recovery can be used to  fund
nonstructural alternatives, as  discussed above, to
avoid  recurrences  of the  flood  patterns.  Such
measures taken for flood control purposes can enable
the creation of permanent riparian and/or wetland
habitats that would otherwise be lost to levees, dikes,
and concrete channels.

3.  Restoration Funds
Under an experiment  in  the  Central Valley  of
California, federal water is provided free-of-charge to
flood privately owned rice paddies in the off-season
after the rice harvest. The flooded rice paddies, with
their abundant stubble and residual feed, provide an
extraordinary feeding and resting stop for waterfowl
on the Pacific Flyway.  Federal water applied for free
thus creates extraordinary habitat value and effectively
extends the  acreage of the limited federal refuges.
These habitat benefits would be costly to create by
direct federal funding mechanisms.  In addition, the
flooded paddies do not need to be burned to remove
the stubble, thus eliminating a substantial cause of the
smoke that  hangs in the winter  inversions  of the

2.  Federal Flood Management

Federal funds appropriated for structural flood control
works (dams, levees, channels) can be redirected to
fund non-structural flood control measures if the flood
The   Central  Valley  Project  Improvement  Act
(CVPIA) (PL 102-575, Title 34) created a special
fund based  on a complex set  of water rates and
surcharges, to pay for various ecological enhancement
and  restoration projects in  the  Central Valley  of
California. The long-standing and continuing losses of
habitat and fish and wildlife resources as a result of the
Federal Central Valley Project water diversions are to
be addressed by this special Restoration Fund.

Revenue flows into the fund from contract renewal
charges, water transfer charges, tiered water prices,
various   surcharges,    and  additional  mitigation
payments. These total revenues are then appropriated
by Congress to  finance various habitat restoration
projects and other fish and wildlife enhancements.
The  annual revenues thus  created equal about $30
million per  year  (adjusted  for  10  year  rolling
averages). The U.S.  Bureau of Reclamation has set
up a Restoration Fund Roundtable comprised of all
stakeholders to provide advice on how to prioritize the

19 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                               February 2003
Fund resources among  the  various  projects for
ecological restoration in the Central Valley.


1.  Endangered Species Assurances

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (FWS) and the
National Marine Fisheries Service  (NMFS)  have
developed several strategies to create partnerships
between the public and private sectors to help protect
the interests of endangered and threatened species on
private  land.   Most of these strategies  focus  on
increased flexibility in the implementation of Section 9
of  the  Endangered Species  Act  (ESA), which
prohibits activities that could cause indirect harm, such
as significant habitat modification.  In general,  these
tools permit actions that would otherwise be deemed
illegal under Section 9  in exchange for stewardship
commitments to manage private lands for species
benefit  or to mitigate  for actions that harm  listed

2.  Habitat Conservation Plans and No

In 1982, the Endangered Species Act was amended
to allowforlhe creation of Habitat Conservation Plans
(HCP) as a means of allowing development of private
lands while protecting species.  An HCP allows the
FWS or the NMFS  to permit  the incidental "taking"
of listed species when the taking is  mitigated  by
conservation measures. In practice, the HCP allows
some individuals of a species to be taken under an
incidental  take  permit  (ITP)  if the  incidental take
occurs during the course of otherwise lawful activities
and provided that the  HCP demonstrates that the
activity will not jeopardize the continued existence of
the species.

Beginning in 1992, the FWS  and the NMFS  also
began to streamline and modify the HCP process with
a  "No  Surprises"  policy  to provide  regulatory
certainty to landowners participating in a HCP. The
"No Surprises" policy assures landowners that no
additional  land  use  restrictions   or  financial
compensation will be required for species covered by
the HCP, even if unforeseen circumstances arise after
the permit is issued.  The intent of the policy is to
afford sufficient incentives for the private sector to
participate in the development of long term HCPs by
providing adequate financial and regulatory certainties
regarding the overall cost of species mitigation.

3.  Safe Harbor Agreement

The  Safe  Harbor concept  is intended  to provide
incentives  for property owners to voluntarily take
stewardship actions that  result in net conservation
benefits for endangered and threatened species. Safe
Harbor agreements are unlike HCP in that:  1) they
must result in a net conservation benefit for listed
species   (i.e.,   they  must   provide  pro   active
management  actions  above  and  beyond what is
required by ESA, as opposed to mitigating for adverse
actions under HCP);  and 2)  they offer  short and
midterm conservation  benefits (as opposed to the
longer term scope ofmostHCP). The agreements are
intended to alleviate landowner fears that successfully
maintained or enhanced  habitats for listed species
could prompt further  land  use restrictions if such
actions encourage the colonization or increase the
number of listed species on their property.

Under a Safe Harbor Agreement, landowners can
commit to manage their lands in a manner that will
benefit listed species in exchange for assurances that
future activities will not be subject to ESA restrictions
above those applicable to the property at the time of
enrollment.  The agreement spells out the baseline
condition  of species as well as the conservation
activities that the landowner agrees to perform.  Once
the agreements are executed, an enhancement of
survival permits is issued that authorizes "take" above

20 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                               February 2003
the baseline limit.   This permit,  in  effect,  allows
landowners to return their property  to its  original
baseline  condition at the end  of the safe  harbor

4.  Candidate Conservation Agreements

Before  a species  has been listed  as  officially
threatened or endangered it receives no protection
under the ESA, even if it is declining and is in an
imperiled state. Landowners, therefore, are under no
legal obligation to refrain from destroying the habitat of
unlisted species. Moreover, landowners have little
incentive to improve or restore habitats for unlisted
species on their property because, if the species is
ultimately listed, their land will be subject to increased
restrictions under Section 9 of the ESA.  Similar to
Safe Harbor  Agreements, Candidate Conservation
Agreements (CCA) has been developed to reverse
such disincentives that deter private landowners from
voluntarily managing  their lands to benefit species.
Instead  of listed  species,  however, CCA  and
associated regulatory  assurances target actions that
benefit species that are proposed as candidate species
for listing.

Under a CCA, property owners identify conservation
actions that they are willing to undertake to  benefit
candidate species.   In  return,  the landowner  can
receive regulatory  assurance that, in the event  the
species is listed, no actions above and beyond those
agreed to in the  CCA would  be required.   The
assurance takes the form of an enhanced survival
permit, which authorizes the incidental-take  of  the
species (should it become listed), provided that  the
terms and conditions of the CCA are met.

5.  Liability Assurances

The  federal   government   can  provide   various
assurances to private parties (developers,  capital
providers, prospective buyers) to reduce the financial
liabilities that encumber properties contaminated with
hazardous substances.   Such assurances can take
various forms: comfort letters, covenants not to sue,
hold-harmless agreements, and prospective purchaser
agreements are a few.  Such assurances can help in
the  redevelopment  of  industrial  lands   (called
brownfields) and therefore avoid development of open
space or undeveloped lands (known as greenfields).

             LOAN PROGRAMS

1.  Clean Water State Revolving Fund

In 1987, Congress created the Clean Water State
Revolving Fund (CW-SRF) to finance water quality
improvement projects.  The  SRF provides loans,
rather than the long-standing practice of federal grant
assistance.    Individual  state revolving funds  are
capitalizedby annual "capitalization" grants fromEPA.
The CW-SRF now holds in excess of $40 billion in
assets and has issued $35 billion in loans. Each year
the SRF fund about $3 billion worth of loans for water
quality projects.

The individual State Revolving Funds (there are now
SRF  programs in each state) work  like  banks.
Federal and state contributions are used to capitalize
or create the banks; these funds are then used to make
low-interest loans for water quality projects.  States
may choose to leverage their capitalization grants by
issuingbonds with the  "cap-grants" as collateral. Loan
recipients repay their loans over the 20-year term of
the loan.  Repaid funds are used to finance new loans
- thus the revolving aspect of the funds.

The SRFs traditionally have  allocated their loan
portfolio to municipal wastewater treatment systems.
Increasingly, the SRFs are funding other water quality
improvement projects, such as land acquisition, non-
point   source  controls,  wetlands  and   estuary
protection, and other types of watershed  projects.
Thus, the SRFs have  become an important source of

21 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                               February 2003
funding for stewardship practices and natural resource
management activities.

While finding a source of repayment for the loan to
acquire lands may prove challenging, many users of
the CW-SRF  have demonstrated a  high level of
creativity in developing sources of repayments.  The
source of repayment need not come from the project
itself. Some possibilities include:

•   Fees paid by developers on other lands
•   Recreational fees (fishing license or park entrance)
•   Dedicated portion of local, county, or state taxes
    or fees
•   Donations or membership dues

Often, properties initially acquired with a loan are re-
sold to an entity for long-term management with the
sales proceeds used to retire the initial loan.
2. Drinking Water State Revolving Fund

In 1996, Congress created the Drinking Water State
Revolving Fund (DW-SRF) as a measure to finance
drinking water protection and treatment projects. It
works in much the same manner as the CW-SRF
described above.

The significant feature of the DW-SRF is that it may
lend funds to acquire critical watershed lands in order
to protect the integrity of present and future water
supplies.  It may also be used to fund source-water
protection programs and stewardship practices on the
watershed  lands in  order to minimize or avoid
increased water treatment  costs downstream at the
drinking water treatment facility.


As a result of regulations created under Section 404
of the Clean Water Act, permits for discharge of fill in
wetlands  can   only  be  authorized  if  mitigation
"sequencing"  requirements  are met:  first avoiding
impacts,  then  minimizing  impacts,  and  finally
compensating  for   any  unavoidable   impacts.
Compensation has usually  been  undertaken  by
replacement of "in-kind" wetlands  (i.e.,  of same
function and value as those filled) at a location "on-
site." The pervasive difficulty of implementing such "in-
kind"/"on-site" mitigation has led to the development
of banks.

1.  Mitigation Banks

Mitigation  banking is the  creation, at  an offsite
location, of a "bank" of wetlands that can be drawn-
on to provide compensatory mitigation in advance of
project impacts.  The "bank" of wetlands is intended
to be "in-kind" (or as close as science can provide).
Such banks enable the consolidation of several small
mitigation projects into a single large tract, and can
bring together greater levels of scientific expertise and
financial  resources.   Moreover, banks  offer the
opportunity to maintain biodiversity  and ecosystem
function in a planned way, while providing market-
based opportunities for investors.

2.  Conservation Banks

Conservationbanks derive their origins frommitigation
banks, but are broader in scope and enhance market-
based  opportunities.  They provide for "offsite"
mitigation and "out-of-kind" mitigation.

Land is acquired or dedicated "up-front" to create a
conservation bank. The  lands  are assembled in a
regional preserve system, and the conservation bank
is required to provide for management of the property
in perpetuity. Conservation banks are pre-approved
by state and federal regulatory and wildlife agencies.

In exchange for dedicating lands to regional preserves,
marketable credits are issued that may thenbe sold to
parties requiring mitigation.   A person  requiring
compensatory mitigation can simply buy a credit for

22 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                               February 2003
each  unit  of  compensatory  mitigation needed.
Compliance  with  compensatory   mitigation
requirements through a conservation bank is easier
than trying to locate a willing seller of land that has the
correct  type  of mitigation habitat, in the correct
location, at a reasonable price. Conservation banks
offer  the   dual  advantages  of building regional
preserves while enabling certain development projects
to proceed with suitable mitigation.

                CHAPTER 4

Stewardship is so integrally connected with land that
to think of stewardship is to think of preserving parcels
of land, in whole  or  in  part.   There  are several
stewardship programs  across the country  that
successfully are preserving land and creating open
space in the landscape by acquiring the land in fee
simply absolute - where the land and all its attributes
are purchased from another owner.  The fee simple
estate in land represents all the interests in the land,
every present interest  and every  future  interest.
However, it is possible to effectively dedicate land to
stewardship purposes without purchasing the entire
fee simple interest to the real property.

The law of real property has common elements
throughout  the fifty states. The law  of each state is
different  and  generally   governs  title  transfer
considerations. A general discussionfollows of various
interests in land and the advantages of acquisition of
less  than  the  entire fee  simple absolute title  for
purposes of stewardship of the land.

Title to  land most commonly is  held in fee simple
absolute (or fee simple) so that all of the interests of
the land accrue to the owner. The owner owns every
aspect  of the  land,  including the right  to use  the
property and its natural resources to the exclusion of
everyone else as well as the  right to  transfer the
property without the consent  of anyone  else.   If
property is viewed as a bundle of sticks with each
stick representing a different interest in the property
the fee simple absolute is the entire bundle of sticks.

The fee simple absolute can be divided in many ways
to create lesser interests in land.  In other words, each
stick in the bundle can be separated from the others.
For example, one can own only:
•  A right to use all or a part of the land (as with an
•  An exclusive or nonexclusive right to occupy all or
   a part of the  land for a stated period of time (as
   with a lease),
•  A right to develop the land (as with a development
•  The right to  use  or  harvest a particular natural
   resource on the land (as with a water right),
•  A right to occupy the land for the rest of one's life
   or the lifetime of another (as with a life estate),
•  A right to own a future interest in land (as with a
   remainder interest).

These  types  of lesser interests in land, or lesser
estates,  and  their  associated lesser economic
valuations,  can  yield  a  set   of  incentives  that
significantly   support  and   enhance   stewardship
practices. This balance of this chapter will examine a
set of tools based on these lesser interest estates in

When a landowner grants a conservation easement to
another entity, the landowner permanently limits uses
of the land in order to protect its conservation values,
but retains the ownership, use and ability to sell the
land. Conservation easements ordinarily will run with
the land, that is, future owners also are bound by the
terms of the easement.  Conservation easements can
be drafted to encumber only part of a parcel of land.

23 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                               February 2003
Moreover, not every conservation easement allows
the public access to the property encumbered by the

Conservation easements may be used for a variety of
purposes, for instance to:

•  Protect habitat, wetlands, river corridors, riparian
   areas, forests, and othernatural resource areas for
   their environmental or ecological values,
•  Protect "working landscapes' and enable the land
   to continue to be used as a commercial or family
•  Create a barrier in the path of urbanization,
•  All of the above.

The landowner may sell the easement or donate the
easement (which yield  different benefits explained
below).   The entity that receives the easement is
usually a government agency, a private land trust, or a
conservation-oriented organization. The land subject
to the easement is managed and cared for pursuant to
a management agreement that specifies stewardship
practices.  Annual  monitoring and inspection of the
land  to  ensure  compliance with the terms of the
easement is ordinarily required under the terms of the

Conservation easements yield an impressive  array of
financial and non-financial benefits to the public and to
the landowner.   All of these benefits support and
enhance the  ethic and practice of stewardship.

1. Benefits to the Public

•  Land is conserved and ecological values protected
   at a cost significantly lower than full acquisition in
   fee simple.
•  Limited capital for conservation can be leveraged,
   thus greatly extending conservation opportunities.
•  Landowners, by dedicating their lands, become
   directly engaged in the conservation enterprise,
   and provide leadership and set an example for
•  Land encumbered by easements may facilitate the
   assembly of protected lands through contiguous
   blocks of parcels at an ecosystem or landscape
   scale. Conversely, easements may prevent the
   fragmentation of habitats and the disruption of
   migratory corridors.
•  Conservation   easements   may  prevent   the
   unplanned and  random  conversion of lands to
   more intensive uses.
•  Purchase of conservation easements can serve as
   a regulatory mitigation for a development that is
   approved for another location.

2. Benefits to a Landowner

•  If the property easement is donated, significant
   tax benefits may accrue to the landowner.
•  If the property  easement is sold, the landowner
   receives a lump sum payment  or a stream of
   payments over time.
   The payments can be used to reduce debts and
   modernize operations; and enable the owner to
   sustain a viable enterprise.
   The  payments  may be  used for retirement
•  The  payments  may be  dedicated to  estate
   The payments maybe reinvested inthe restoration
   of  the land by direct  capital expenditures for
   improvements,   or   for   financing   capital
   improvements over time, and/or by serving as a
   match for governmental programs for restoration.
   The presence of a conservationeasement reduces
   assessed  value  of the  property  and thereby
   reduces property tax assessments.
   The presence of a conservationeasement on land,
   by reducing the property tax assessment, reduces

24 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                               February 2003
    the ultimate value of the estate of the landowner
    and lessens the tax burden on the estate and heirs.

Beyond these financial benefits to the landowner, there
is another set  of benefits that support the ethic of
stewardship. Landowners' motivations are complex
and  deeply  rooted  in personal beliefs  about land
preservation  and  stewardship.    Some  of  the
motivations to sell or donate a conservation easement

       With the  development  potential  of  the
       property eliminated or reduced, the land has
       a  lesser valuation and lesser tax burden,
       allowing many families to retain the property
       in  family   ownership   for   succeeding
       generations, especially for home sites for their
•      The property holds deep personal attachment,
       reflecting years of hard work, and a  history of
       sustained family ownership and care for the
       land.  A conservation easement can ensure
       that  the land is preserved  to  reflect  the
       family's values.
       The property can contribute to a viable local
       or regional agricultural community, and can
       help  retain the  agricultural character of the


Another lesser  interest in land that can be transferred
independently  of the  fee interest  to   support
stewardship in a community is the right to develop the
land in accordance with local regulatory authorities
such as zoning and conditional use permits. There are
a variety of relatively new tools that maybe employed
to remove or transfer the right to  develop from one
parcel to another.  These techniques are known as
"compensatory regulations." They  hold the promise of
providing  regulatory   relief   for  landowners,
compensating affected landowners, augmenting public
land  acquisition  programs,  and  establishing  a
permanent conservation -oriented land use policy.

1.     Transferable Development Credits (by

In a  Transferable  Development Credits  ("TDC")
program, individual landowners can voluntarily enter
into negotiations whereby the owner (sender) of open
space, agricultural,  or habitat land sells or transfers
"development  credits"  to a  developer  (receiver)
wishing to  increase the density of a developable
parcel.   Local governments  can encourage  such
transfers by acting as facilitator and by allowing an
increase in density over the base zoning on the
receiver's parcel in return  for  a dedication of a
perpetual easement on the sender's parcel. This type
of program is voluntary and requires developers to
identify and negotiate with willing sellers of TDCs on
a case-by-case basis.

2.     Transferable Development Credits (by

Instead of having landowners negotiate TDC deals on
a project-by-project basis,  local governments  can
adopt a TDC ordinance to encourage protection of
open space, agricultural land, and habitat lands, while
guiding future development into areas most capable of
supporting  increased density.   A TDC  ordinance
designates  by  zoning  "sender  areas"  where
development is restricted and "receiver areas" where
density may be increased.  Landowners wishing to
develop above the base zoning in designated receiver
areas must acquire TDCs from landowners in the
sender areas.  When TDCs are sold, the sending
parcel must  dedicate  a  perpetual  conservation
easement to encumber the land that prohibits future
subdivision or changes in use. In some circumstances,
TDCs may be  severed  from the land and traded  on
the open market. In addition, severable TDCs may be

25 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                                                                             February 2003
mortgaged and leveraged to acquire large tracts of
land in sender areas.
Tradable Conservation Credits
Landowners who voluntarily preserve their lands (for
instance, through conservation easements)  may be
entitled to earn "conservation credits."  Such credits
may be freely tradable at market prices to allow
landowners who need credits for regulatory mitigation
to  purchase  them  from  landowners who  have
exercised stewardship to preserve their lands. Credits
could also be earned for actions to restore and/or
enhance habitats.

4.     Purchase of Development Rights

Development rights may be purchased on the open
market by private land trusts or conservation-oriented
organizations and then simply held in perpetuity to
prevent future development or subdivision. The public
benefits by the purchase in that the land is protected in
perpetuity; and the landowner benefits by the financial
reward for his stewardship practices.


In order to facilitate the  practice of stewardship,
especially for the benefit of aquatic habitats and
riparian  corridors,  certain water rights may be
transferred, assigned, donated, or sold.

The transfer  of a  water right  from an  on-land
application (such as irrigation) to sustain in-stream
flows for enhancement of a  fishery, protection  of
aquatic habitats, and/or protection of a riparian stream
zone are a new and growing practice.  Sometimes the
right is  permanently transferred  through a market
transaction; or the right can be temporarily leased for
a limited period to correspond to a critical seasonal
flow need. These seasonal in-stream flow dedications
can produce considerable benefit to habitat without
the need  for lengthy and expensive water right
proceedings or adjudicatory hearings.

State law varies as to the mechanics of water right
transfers. Often the state must deem that in-stream
flows are a "beneficialuse". Downstream right holders
and  senior right holders must be protected and/or

            LIFE ESTATES AND

A landowner may wish to enjoy his property during
his lifetime but want to  dedicate the property to
conservation purposes after his death. In such a case,
rather than providing for  disposition of his land in his
will,  he may find  it to  his financial  advantage to
consider transferring the property  during his lifetime,
but reserving a life estate to himself. During the term
of his life estate, the landowner remains in title to and
possession of the land,  subject  to the remainder
interest of the owner of the remainder interest  (the
"remainderman").  Such an arrangement requires that
the owner of the life estate preserve the  property
during  his  life   estate   for  the  benefit  of  the
remainderman. It also could be drafted to require that
the remainderman has an obligation to maintain the
property for conservation purposes upon the death of
the owner of the life estate. Donation of a remainder
interest for conservation  purposes may qualify for
favorable tax treatment.
                                                              CHAPTER 5

                                               This paper has explored the concept of stewardship as
                                               an important means to restore and protect America's
                                               land  legacy and  has  set  forth the  essence  of

26 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                        February 2003
stewardship,  principles for  stewardship,  and a
framework to further instill stewardship in the ethos of
the United States. It makes the case that the practice
of stewardship can produce substantial economic and
environmental value to  society. It also presents  an
open-ended  compilation of  policies,  tools  and
incentives that will support stewardship as an ethic and
implement stewardship as a practice.

Based on this research, EFAB finds:

       The ethic of stewardship should be the basis
       and guiding theme for the conservation of
       America's land legacy, and  should be the
       foundation   for  a   public   and   private
       commitment to ensure  the present and future
       productivity of our lands and watersheds.

•      The practice of stewardship should be the
       preferred management strategy to be applied
       to America's landscape of public and private
       lands,  and  should  be supported with a
       portfolio of tools, policies, financial incentives,
       information and education.

EFAB strongly believes that stewardship should be a
compelling component of America's overall agenda
for environmental protection,  ecological restoration,
and  economic vitality.   Stewardship  builds upon
America's fundamental  values:  individual  and civic
responsibility, volunteerism, systems of incentives and
rewards,   and  a  care  for  future  generations.
Stewardship rightfully belongs within the mission of the
Environmental Protection Agency; and with EPA's
capable leadership  can become a  critical part of our
future environmental plans.

EFAB therefore offers the following recommendations
to the Administrator:
EPA should embrace stewardship as a core
value of the Agency, and as a foundation for
the Strategic Plan.

EPA should perform an internal review of its
authorities, programs, and initiatives to identify
their contributions to individual stewardship,
community  stewardship,  and  corporate
stewardship. This review would be the basis
to advance stewardship as a coherent and
central theme of EPA's  Strategic Plan and
annual budget.

EPA  should realign  its  grant assistance
programs to states and communities to foster
and support stewardship  practices.   For
example,  funding for watershed  councils
would  directly   support  on-the-ground
stewardship  practices  that  enhance and
protect the integrity of the land and  water

EPA   should  create  an internet-based
clearinghouse dedicated to stewardship to
promote  the exchange  of ideas,  provide
benchmarks of  successful practices, and
inform and educate.

EPA  should work  with  the Council  on
Environmental Quality, the Department of
Interior, the Department of Education and the
Department of Agriculture to  organize and
convene a national dialogue on stewardship to
engage  stewards   and   practitioners  in
development  of a national framework  for

EPA should vigorously implement the  Clean
Water Action Plan (CWAP) as a model for
Federal  interagency   cooperation  on
watershed  management.    Through the
CWAP, and other interagency committees,

Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
February 2003
       EPA should support implementation of the
       Farm Bill and its compelling stewardship
       incentives for farmland conservation, wetlands
       restoration, and habitat protection.

•      EPA should  reconsider EFAB's  prior
       recommendation for a new financing vehicle
       for  stewardship  in   the  form of   an
       Environmental State Revolving Fund (ESRF).
       Building  on the exemplary success of the
       Agency's CWSRF and  DWSRF, a  new
       revolving  fund  can be developed  and
       capitalized  for  sustainable   financing  of
       stewardship practices.

EFAB  urges the Administrator to consider these
recommendations and  take  advantage  of  this
opportunity  in these pivotal times to more firmly
establish the ethic and practice of stewardship within
the  bedrock of  America's values to protect and
preserve our lands and watersheds for all generations
to come.   The  Board  stands  ready  to assist  the
Agency in this important endeavor.

             APPENDIX  1

             San Francisco, CA
               August 8, 2001


1.     The use  and disposition of privately held
       land is determined primarily by market
       forces and by applicable laws,regulations,
       and codes. In addition to these driving
       forces,   long-term  conservation   and
       stewardship of private  lands may need
       creative   tools   and  incentives    to
                                                     supplement these market and regulatory

                                                     a.     What is the appropriate  role of
                                                            voluntary  efforts   by  private
                                                            owners   in   the   long-term
                                                            conservation and stewardship of
                                                            their lands?
                                                     b.     What is the potential to instill a
                                                            stewardship ethic and to apply
                                                            stewardship "best management
                                                            practices" for the management of
                                                            private lands?

                                                     What  manner of incentives may be
                                                     appropriate to encourage and reward
                                                     stewardship practices? Please comment
                                                     on the potential utility of:

                                                     a.     information and education
                                                     b.     recognition and rewards
                                                     c.     technical  assistance  and  peer
                                                     d.     financial assistance
                                                     e.     tax considerations
                                                     f.     commodity   prices   support
                                                     g.     other creative incentive.

                                                     As  a manager of the  public lands, as  a
                                                     regulator, and as a provider of financial
                                                     assistance the federal government plays
                                                     an important role in promoting the  ethic
                                                     and practice  of  stewardship.   Please
                                                     comment on how the federal government
                                                     could improve its performance and make
                                                     a greater positive impact to promote
                                                     stewardship.  Does  the  federal
                                                     government  have  a  role  to provide  a
                                                     forum for the various groups interestedin
                                                     stewardship,   i.e., states,  non-profits,
                                                     business organizations and  faith-based

28 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                            February 2003
      organizations, to meet and craft a unified
      approach to a national policy regarding

      Stewardship through land acquisition in
      fee  simple  absolute  now  is  being
      supplemented by creative acquisitions of
      less-than-fee-simple  estates.    These
      lesser   estates   in  land   include
      conservation easements, development
      rights,  water  rights  and  greenway
      easements, among others.

      a.     Please comment on the financial
             advantages of acquisition of less a
             than fee simple estate in land for
             stewardship purposes.
      b.     How can the  purchase of lesser
             estates   in  land,   including
             easements   and  development
             rights, promote the ethic  and
             practice of stewardship?
      c.     What   financial   tools    or
             mechanisms might be applied to
             the  purchase of easements and
             other lesser  estates in land  in
             order to  optimize  the  capital
             investment outlay?

      What  is the potential for  using  loans
      rather than grants as the  investment
      vehicle? Should loans be structured to
      create a revolving or sustaining source of
      investment capital?

      What  is   the  potential  for  creating
      permanent endowment funds and/or fully
      capitalized  accounts  that  could  be
      managed to support private stewardship
      practices   or  to  support  care  and
      restoration of lands and habitats? What
      are  the comparative  advantages  and
      disadvantages of the different vehicles
      that   have  established   permanent
      endowments for stewardship?

7.     In the TMDL program for water quality
      management    in   a   watershed,
      responsibility for pollutant reductions is
      allocated to all discharges.

      a.     What is the potential to employ
             trading regimes to enable cost-
             effective   pollution   control
             investments  to  be  made within
             water sheds? For example, would a
             mechanism that allowed trading
             between point source discharges
             and non-point discharges promote
      b.     What is the potential to employ
             market  mechanisms  for  cost-
             effective  reduction  of pollutant
             discharges  to   meet   TMDL
             allocations? For example, do you
             think  an  open  market  for the
             buying and selling of "discharge
             reduction  credits"  would be an
             effective stewardship tool?


American Farmland Trust, "Saving the Farm: A
Handbook for Conserving Agricultural Land",
Washington, DC, 1990.

Aspen Institute,  "The Stewardship Path  to
Sustainable Natural Systems", 1999.

Bank of America, "Beyond Sprawl: NewPatterns
of Growth To Fit the New California", 1995.

29 Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB)
                            February 2003
California Environmental Dialogue, "Habitat and
Prosperity: Protecting California's Future", 1998.

California  Environmental  Dialogue,   "Land
Conservation in California: Needs for the Next
Decade", 1999.

California  Legislative   Analyst's  Office,
"California's Land Conservation  Efforts:  The
Role of State Conservancies", 2001.

California State Coastal Conservancy, "Options
for Wetlands   Conservation:  A Guide  for
California Landowners", 1994.

Centerforthe Continuing Study of the  California
Economy,  "Land  Use and the  California
Economy: Principles for Prosperity and Quality
of Life", 1998.

Colorado Cattleman's Agricultural Land Trust,
"Keeping  the  Family  in  the Family  Ranch:
Private Land Conservation in the West", 1997.

Defenders  of Wildlife, "National  Stewardship
Initiatives: Conservation  Strategies for  U.S.
Land Owners", 1998.

Defenders of Wildlife, "Stewardship Incentives:
Conservation Strategies for Oregon's Working
Landscapes", 1998.

Glickfeld,   Jacques,  Kieser,   and  Olson,
"Ecosystem Management,  Implementation
Techniques  and Strategies  for  Conservation
Plans", Land  Use and Environment  Forum,
Volume 4, Number 1,1995.

Interagency Ecosystem  Management  Task
Force,  "The  Ecosystem  Approach: Healthy
Ecosystems and Sustainable Economies", 1995.
National  Wildlife   Federation,   "Working
Landscapes: Cultivating Conservation in the
2002 Farm Bill", 2001.

Resources Agency of California, "Preserving
California's  Natural  Heritage: A Bioregional
Guide to Land and Water Conservation", 1998.

Rilla and Sokolow, "California Farmers  and
Conservation   Easements:  Motivations,
Experiences,  and   Perceptions   in  Three
Counties", University of California Agricultural
Issues Center, 2000.

The Keystone Center, "National Policy Dialogue
on Ecosystems Management", 1996.

The  Sonoran Institute, "Preserving Working
Ranches in the West", Tucson, AZ, 1997.

Wilson, Edward  P.. The Future of Life. Alfred A,
Knopf, New York, 2002.