Conserving nostalgia: exploring private land protection patterns

  • Alana N. SeamanEmail author
  • James R. Farmer
  • H. Charles Chancellor
  • Agnes Sirima


The dramatic loss of open space in the USA over the last 50 years has led to increased conservation efforts by public, private, and non-profit entities. Amongst private landowners, conservation easements, or conditions written into a property’s title that permanently limit how it may be used, are a popular form of land protection. Private land protection is vital for both the conservation of America’s characteristic open spaces, and to ensure the future of many threatened and endangered plant and animal species. Yet little is known about the people who are placing conservation easements on their properties, the landscape features and land use practices currently being protected under conservation easements, or the ways in which these conservation patterns will continue into the future. Regardless, private land conservation efforts are shaping the American landscape; therefore, a thorough understanding of their characteristics is needed. Given that nostalgia, or an idealized and simplified notion of the past, underlies many of the motivations private landowners have for protecting their properties, this study suggests that there is a link between the type of nostalgia motivating private land protection and the types of land and land use practices being conserved. Further, the authors contend that this phenomenon is worthy of further investigation given its potential for environmental, social, and economic impact.


Private land conservation Land donation Nostalgia Land protection Conservation easements 


  1. Babbie E (2014) The basics of social research. Wadsworth Publishing, BelmontGoogle Scholar
  2. Blair S (1998) Cultural geography and the place of the literary. Am Lit Hist 10(3):544–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bronstein S, Griffin D, Richards C (2017) Interior secretary pushing controversial road project. CNN. Retrieved from
  4. Bruckner M, Hsu HL (eds) (2007) American literary geographies. University of Delaware Press, NewarkGoogle Scholar
  5. Byerly A (1996) The uses of the landscape: the picturesque and the National Park System. In: Fromm H, Glotfelty C (eds) The ecocriticism reader: landmarks in literary ecology. University of Georgia Press, AthensGoogle Scholar
  6. Cheever F (1996) Public good and private magic in the law of land trusts and conservation easements: a happy present and a troubled future. Denver Law Review 73:1077–1102Google Scholar
  7. Creswell JW (2007) Qualitative inquiry & research design: choosing among the five approaches. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  8. Cruel S (2017) Dakota access pipeline in operation after months of resistance. PBS News Hour. Retrieved from
  9. Curry TA, Reid RA (2017) Trump is being sued to keep him from shrinking Bear Ears national monument by 85 percent. Who will win? The Washington Post. Retrieved from
  10. Davis F (1979) Yearning for yesterday: a sociology of nostalgia. Free PressGoogle Scholar
  11. Deci EL (1975) Intrinsic motivation. Plenum, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Drost D, Long G, Wilson D, Miller B (1996) Barriers to adopting sustainable agriculture practices. J Ext 34(6):1–6Google Scholar
  13. Duncan JS, Duncan NG (2001) The Aestheticization of the politics of landscape preservation. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 91:387–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ellingson T (2001) The myth of the noble savage. University of California Press, BerkeleyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ernest T, Wallace GN (2008) Characteristics, motivations and management actions of landowners in private land conservation in Larimer County Colorado. Nat Areas J 28(2):109–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Farmer JR, Chancellor C, Fischer BC (2011a) Motivations for using conservation easements as a land protection mechanism: a mixed methods analysis. Nat Areas J 31(1):80–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Farmer J, Knapp D, Meretsky VJ, Chancellor C, Fischer BC (2011b) Motivations influencing the adoption of conservation easements. Conserv Biol 25(4):827–834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Feinberg PB (1997) An evaluation of landowner satisfaction with conservation restrictions. Thesis for the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and ForestryGoogle Scholar
  19. Frost W, Hall CM (2009) Tourism and national parks: international perspectives, developments, histories, and change. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Goulding C (2002) An exploratory study of age related vicarious nostalgia and aesthetic consumption. Adv Consum Res 29:542–546Google Scholar
  21. Graf WL (1993) Landscapes, commodities, and ecosystems: the relationship between policy and science for American rivers. In Sustaining our water resources: water science and technology board symposium. Washington, DC: National Academy PressGoogle Scholar
  22. Halfacre A (2015) Nostalgia as a catalyst for conservation in the Carolina Lowcountry. J Environ Stud Sci 6:774–778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Holak SL, Havlena WJ (1998) Feelings, fantasies, and memories: an examination of the emotional components of nostalgia. J Bus Res 42:217–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Holbrook MB (1993) Nostalgia and consumption preferences: some emerging patterns of consumer tastes. J Consum Res 20:245–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hsu HL (2005) Literature and regional production. Am Lit Hist 19(1):36–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kabii T, Horwitz P (2006) A review of landholder motivations and determinants for participation in conservation covenanting programmes. Environ Conserv 33(1):1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kiesecker JM, Comendant T, Grandmason T, Gray E, Hall C, Hilsenbek R, Kareiva P, Lozier L, Naehu P, Rissman A, Shaw MR, Zankel M (2007) Conservation easements in context: a quantitative analysis of their use by The Nature Conservancy. Front Ecol Environ 5(3):125–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Land Trust Alliance (2017) 2015 Land Trust Census [Data file]. Retrieved from
  29. Lefebvre H (1992) The production of space. Wiley-Blackwell, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  30. Lowenthal D (1985) The past is a foreign country. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  31. Lowenthal D (1998) The heritage crusade and the spoils of history. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mandler P (1997) Against ‘Englishness’: English culture and the limits to rural nostalgia, 1850–1940. Trans R Hist Soc 7:155–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McLaughlin NA (2004) Increasing the tax incentives for conservation easement donations: a responsible approach. Ecol Law Quart 31(1):1–115Google Scholar
  34. Merchant C (2007) American environmental history: an introduction. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Merenlender AM, Huntsinger L, Guthey G, Fairfax S (2002) Land trusts and conservation easements: who is conserving what for whom? Conserv Biol 18(1):65–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Morrisette PM (2001) Conservation easements and the public good: preserving the environment on private lands. Nat Resour J 4(2):373–426Google Scholar
  37. Moustakas C (1994) Phenomenological research methods. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. National Park Service (2017) About us. National Park Service. Retrieved from
  39. Ochterski JA (1996) Why land is protected: motivations underlying real estate donations to land conservancies. Unpublished master’s thesis. School of Natural Resources and Environment, University of MichiganGoogle Scholar
  40. Oravec C (1981) John Muir, Yosemite, and the sublime response: a study in the rhetoric of preservation. Q J Speech 67(3):245–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rilla E, Sokolow AD, Kozloff R, Lemp C (2000) California farmers and conservation easements: motivations, experiences, and perceptions in three counties. Research Paper # 4. University of California Agricultural Issues CenterGoogle Scholar
  42. Runte A (1997) National parks: the American experience. University of Nebraska Press, LincolnGoogle Scholar
  43. Ryden KC (1999) Writing the Midwest: history, literature, and regional identity. Geogr Rev 89(4):511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sauer CO (1925) The morphology of the landscape. University of California Publications in Geography. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  45. Schama S (1996) Landscape and memory. Vintage Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  46. Soja EW (1989) Postmodern geographies: the reassertion of space in critical social theory. Verso, LondonGoogle Scholar
  47. Sokolow AD (2002) Agricultural easements limited geographically. Calif Agric 56(1):15–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Spaulding J (1998) Ansel Adams and the American landscape: a biography. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  49. Stern PC (1993) A second environmental science: Human–environment interactions. Science 260(5116):1897–1899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Stokowski PA (2002) Languages of place and discourses of power: constructing new senses of place. J Leis Res 34(4):368–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Strohmeier G (1997) Wild west imagery: landscape perception in nineteenth-century America. In: Teich M, Porter R, Gustafsson B (eds) Nature and society in historical context. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  52. Taun YF (1974) Topophilia: a study of environmental perception, attitudes, and values. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  53. The Nature Conservancy (n.d.) Conservation easements: all about conservation easements. Retrieved from
  54. Timothy DJ (2011) Cultural and heritage tourism: an introduction. Channel View, BristolGoogle Scholar
  55. Tyler N, Ligibel TJ, Tyler IR (2009) Historic preservation: an introduction to its history, principles and practice. W.W. Norton & Co., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  56. U.S.D.A. (United States Department of Agriculture) Natural Resources Conservation Service (2007) Major uses of land in the United States, 2007. Retrieved from
  57. USFWS (United States Department of Fish and Wildlife Services) (n.d.) Threatened and endangered species and the private landowner. Retrieved from
  58. Wilson A (1992) The culture of nature: North American landscape from Disney to the Exxon Valdez. Blackwell Publishers, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© AESS 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Recreation, Sports Leadership, & Tourism Management, School of Health & Applied Human SciencesUniversity of North Carolina WilmingtonWilmingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Recreation, Park, & Tourism StudiesIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism ManagementClemson UniversityClemsonUSA
  4. 4.Department of Wildlife ManagementSokoine University of AgricultureMorogoroTanzania

Personalised recommendations