Is it controversial for private organizations to lease and own lands and resources lying within ocean and coastal waters for conservation purposes?

As with anything new, there are bound to be concerns raised about leasing and ownership. However, leasing and ownership of lands and resources lying within ocean and coastal waters are not new — they have been going on for hundreds of years. While the majority of historical leasing and ownership has been undertaken for residential and commercial purposes, there are examples of them happening for private conservation purposes as well. The issue is not that conservation leasing and ownership are new, the issue is conservation leasing and ownership are not widely understood or applied. As a result, much of the work needed to undertake leasing or ownership projects may be educational in nature, which is necessary to overcome historical practices and widely-held misperceptions. In some cases, management agencies and private landowners may even be adverse to the concept of leasing and owning ocean and coastal lands and resources for conservation purposes. This adversarial response should be expected and met with patience and determination.

Woodard Bay lease site, Mt. Rainier in background. Photo courtesy The Nature Coservancy, Washington

Much of the information found within this toolkit is meant to help conservation practitioners address predictable concerns, controversy, and resistance. Many of the common issues encountered include the following:

• Aquaculture areas or leases can only be used for commercial and recreational harvest (see response)
• Conservation organizations should not undertake what governments should already be doing on public lands (see responses here and here)
• Conservation organizations will keep businesses from developing and using important economic sites (see response)
• Leasing public lands for conservation purposes has never been done before (see response)
• Leasing public lands for conservation purposes is against law and policy (see response)
• Leasing public lands for conservation purposes will restrict the future use of the site (see response)
• Leasing of state lands must be done for an active use (see response)
• Private conservation leasing and ownership cannot infringe on tribal treaty rights (see response)
• Private conservation leasing and ownership will restrict our recreational access and use of the shore and waters (see response)
• Private ownership of submerged lands is not possible (see response)
• States simply don't lease public lands for conservation purposes (see response)