We can also look into reducing the amount of monocropping we do. If the grain isn’t profitable, the land it’s grown on will drop in value, making it easier to purchase and use for re-wilding efforts.
Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?
11–20 of 156 posts
Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?
#12No. Most places have 'immanent domain' type laws were the gov can essentially seize your property (forcing a sale) to give to someone else. A rich developer could see all that sweet sweet natural land and make a strong case (with lobbying, backroom deals, the usual) that it would be better used with a new condo or factory or strip mine and get it anyway.
Note that this article is about the UK. It discusses your point in part 3 and goes on to discuss an alternative solution at the end. There are complex laws as almost all of the land is privately owned by either private citizens or the crown.
Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?
#13In the United States, the American Prairie Reserve [1] is doing something along these lines in the area around the Wyoming/Montana border. In particular, their purchases (which often include private ranches that come up for sale) focus on building those corridors between existing public lands, effectively creating much larger continuous ecosystems that this article mentioned. It's probably easier to do in the United…
Wow, TIL the Missouri river flows through Montana (from the map on the American Prairie site).
It's not clear from a cursory glance at the site whether American Prairie is giving the land to the public, or whether they retain ownership and are simply allowing public access. I would think giving it to some federal parks/wildlife agency would come with stronger protections than an NGO could provide. I'm also curious if anyone can just give their private land to the public for use as a wildlife preserve?
EDIT: I also found this map of protected lands, but I'm having a hard time discerning between the different colors and I'm not colorblind. http://www.protectedlands.net/map/
Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?
#14Its an unpopular opinion but no. Much as we cannot stop drowning in water with more water, we cannot extinguish climate change caused by technocratic neoliberal consumer capitalism with more of the same. The effort must exist outside a market. it cannot be commercialized, it exists as an inefficiency, and it remains a corrective action to right some of the most egregious hubris of mankinds existence on this planet. ideally it should be done in silence without marketing, discipline without aggrandizement, and with remorse.
Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?
#15No. Most places have 'immanent domain' type laws were the gov can essentially seize your property (forcing a sale) to give to someone else. A rich developer could see all that sweet sweet natural land and make a strong case (with lobbying, backroom deals, the usual) that it would be better used with a new condo or factory or strip mine and get it anyway.
Eminent domain is close to dead in the US. We nearly always lack sufficient political consensus to use it. It is partly why new infrastructure projects are increasingly rare and significantly more expensive.
Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?
#16Its an unpopular opinion but no. Much as we cannot stop drowning in water with more water, we cannot extinguish climate change caused by technocratic neoliberal consumer capitalism with more of the same. The effort must exist outside a market. it cannot be commercialized, it exists as an inefficiency, and it remains a corrective action to right some of the most egregious hubris of mankinds existence on this planet. i…
You say that as though no one outside of a market economy every burned coal or clear cut a forrest.
Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?
#17The big problem, at least in the US, is that we don't build things anymore. The homeless camp 2 blocks from me is one glaring proof.
The lack of power generation, power transmission, and pretty much any infrastructure you can think of is another.
I agree that there is some conflict of interest between humans and untouched nature, and I am firmly on the side of us, humanity!
What side are you on?
Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?
#18In the United States, the American Prairie Reserve [1] is doing something along these lines in the area around the Wyoming/Montana border. In particular, their purchases (which often include private ranches that come up for sale) focus on building those corridors between existing public lands, effectively creating much larger continuous ecosystems that this article mentioned. It's probably easier to do in the United…
Wow, TIL the Missouri river flows through Montana (from the map on the American Prairie site). It's not clear from a cursory glance at the site whether American Prairie is giving the land to the public, or whether they retain ownership and are simply allowing public access. I would think giving it to some federal parks/wildlife agency would come with stronger protections than an NGO could provide. I'm also curious if…
> I would think giving it to some federal parks/wildlife agency would come with stronger protections than an NGO could provide.
Not really. Federal agencies sell parklands from time to time. It's easier to have an NGO that won't sell the land for a long time.
Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?
#19No. Most places have 'immanent domain' type laws were the gov can essentially seize your property (forcing a sale) to give to someone else. A rich developer could see all that sweet sweet natural land and make a strong case (with lobbying, backroom deals, the usual) that it would be better used with a new condo or factory or strip mine and get it anyway.
So you get your money back, and then you use it to buy other land. Same same?
Re: Can we protect land for nature and carbon by simply buying it up?
#20In the US we struggle to protect the land that is already owned by state and federal agencies.
For example, each year we spend billions on fire suppression on public land. And most year more acres burn and the cost increases.
https://www.nifc.gov/fire-information/statistics
5,510,675 Acres Year-to-date Acres Burned
FY 2021 suppression cost $4,389,000,000
Conservation his hard especially in a landscape where we fail to manage fire effectively.