Conservation easements have proven to be an effective way to preserve private land for environmental or historic purposes. Congress shouldn't destroy a system that has demonstrated its value over and over again in recent years because a few would abuse the system.

A congressional committee has recommended sharp revisions in the tax incentive program that would virtually eliminate their use. It has failed to recognize that conservation easements have been applied responsibly on the whole, and to great public benefit. Additional safeguards may be needed, but not a wholesale revision that would hamstring the efforts of conservation and historic preservation groups throughout the nation.

There may be no better place than the South Carolina Lowcountry to see the easements' importance. Tens of thousands of acres of farm and forest land have been preserved in perpetuity in the ACE Basin, the Santee Delta and along the Cooper River by landowners who have collectively agreed to help stem the tide of coastal development.

While those private landowners have received tax benefits for their donations, they have been primarily motivated by a love of a coastal landscape that is rapidly disappearing. Collectively, they have preserved vast areas of natural habitat and miles of scenic vistas, both comprising a valuable public benefit.
Easements also have helped encourage the preservation of historic properties with tax credits that help defray the expense of restoration and maintenance. In Charleston, easements have contributed to the architectural integrity of the historic city. Preserving the old city's wealth of 18th and 19th century architecture is of great public value in itself. It is amplified by the economic importance of the historic city to the region's tourist economy.

Organizations that include the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Land Trust Alliance insist that accountability standards can be improved to limit abuses. In a recent letter to leading congressmen, the National Trust and other historic preservation groups summed up the proposal to effectively eliminate conservation easements as one that "would throw the baby out with the bath water."

The groups cited the value provided to the nation since the tax incentive program was approved by Congress in 1976: "Conservation and preservation easements serve to preserve thousands of historic sites and millions of acres of historically and environmentally sensitive resources across the country, serving the important public policy goal of protecting America's rich and diverse heritage."

Gov. Mark Sanford eloquently argued against abridging incentives for conservation easements in a letter to Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, a leading critic of the program. Gov. Sanford noted that South Carolina loses some 200 acres to development each day, and said that conservation easements have served as "a cost- efficient, non-intrusive means of securing important land in the face of this growth pressure."

He listed several compelling reasons to retain the program. It accomplishes land conservation at a fraction of the public
expense of outright purchase. Land is retained on the tax rolls, and no public funds are required for its maintenance. Easements don't require regulatory intervention by the government, while frequently providing higher levels of protection.

The governor said audits of conservation easements, such as that undertaken by the state Department of Revenue, can limit abuses. Revenue Department director Burnett R. Maybank III believes there are instances, for example, of garden variety golf courses being given a conservation value by developers. Regular monitoring and stronger penalties would eliminate any abuses.

The Lowcountry Open Land Trust offers an example of how accountability can be achieved. The Land Trust has been instrumental in voluntary land conservation in Charleston County, with nearly 40,000 acres under easement. *

It first determines if property proposed for an easement actually possesses a conservation value, then examines its appraisal to determine if it is excessive. Finally, the Land Trust examines the tax credit taken on the donor's tax form, retaining the option to cancel an easement before the tax credit is submitted. Inappropriate and inflated easements are filtered out in the process.

Gov. Sanford cited the nationally recognized ACE Basin project as an example of how tax incentives have encouraged a common conservation vision "for the greater good." The result has been perpetual protections on 125,000 acres, and the number continues to grow. South Carolina would have been unable to achieve anything of that magnitude with its own limited resources.

Congress' goal should be to improve oversight of a system that has helped achieve important conservation and preservation goals, not the least of which has been engaging the support of private landowners in the process.