Professionalization

Respondents also discussed developments in the nonprofit conservation sector: an increase in the number of organizations, and an evolving professionalization of the

conservation field, which emerged in response to increasing (internal and external) pressures for legal, financial, and technical accountability.

Land trust growth

The 1990’s has been called the “decade of destiny” for land trusts because of the number of them that were established during this time (Qtd in Brewer 2003, p. 182). According to Brewer, “the post-1980 boom in land trusts was fueled by the realization that the government had not just abdicated leadership in the conservation wars but had defected to the enemy army” (2003, p. 37). The Reagan conservative era nearly vaporized all federal grant money, and states and private organizations stepped up to fill the void. The Land Trust Alliance, an umbrella organization devoted to land trust support, was established and

provided resources for people interested in forming new land trusts. The result was a positive feedback in the number of organizations devoted to conservation land.

96

Today, all 100 counties in NC have at least one land trust working in their territories, although the concentration of land trusts is regionally skewed towards the mountains and piedmont (one trust covers the 32 outer coastal plain/tidewater counties). As of 2003, NC had more land trusts than any other state in the southeast (Brewer 2003), and the Land Trust Alliance reported in 2005 that NC land trusts had protected more acres compared to the land trusts of other states (LTA 2005).

Figure 4.3

a. (above) Number of NC land trusts established over time; As of 2010 there are 24 land trusts operating in the state.

b. (left) Staffing capacity of NC land trusts; 16% rely on all volunteer or all part-time staff; 33% have between 3 and 6 full time staff.

Land trust staff capacity in NC has increased 87% since 2000 (LTA 2005). Staffing capacity ranges from one trust with 14 fulltime staff to one trust with all volunteer staff; a third of NC land trusts employ between 3 and 6 fulltime staff (Fig. 4.3b). Most NC land trusts that employ fulltime staff employ additional part-time staff (CTNC 2010).

“Professionalization”

One accompanying factor of the increase in number of land trusts and land trust employees, was described by one land trust respondent, as “a professionalization of the conservation community”:

"The other thing [that has made this an active time for local land conservation] is what I would describe as a professionalization of the conservation community, particularly on the non-profit side, but even on the government side, you just saw a lot more professionals working for land

conservation, than there had been before, bring smarts and sophistication to the table…the amount of work has increased many fold, and the sophistication, the kinds of projects that we're working on -- I am amazed." [3, my italics]

Professionalization is defined by the above respondent in terms of a more

professionally trained and oriented staff bringing “smarts and sophistication” to the field. Based on this interview and other interviews, I take “sophistication”, in terms of the quality of projects, to refer to projects that are larger in scale, that perhaps involve several land owners, may require partnerships with other institutions, and require special stewardship. These types of projects have required hiring legal advisors, seasonal ecologists, GIS specialists, etc.

At the same time, the situation can also arise for which professional staff is necessary before projects can be successfully undertaken. In the words of another respondent from the land trust sector: “you encounter the need for a highly qualified professional staff” [21]. “Need” for professional staff has arisen because as conservation work has become more

98

technically complicated, public accountability has increased. The following quote suggests that professionalization is an important step towards long term stability and accountability: “For land trusts in general, this work has gotten more complicated and accountability is critical. It's important to us and other land trusts to have professionalism on their staff…we are all concerned that we have permanence in our work and we demand of each other a high level of professionalism.” [21, my italics]

While individual land trusts’ constituencies have demanded more accountability in recent years, NC organizations have also felt more keenly the national land trust movement’s insistence on increased transparency and documentation and have responded in turn. The Land Trust Alliance has promoted and provided resources for increased accountability and professionalization, including an accreditation certification program that helps land trusts ensure that their policies and programs, "meet the national standards for excellence, uphold the public trust and ensure that conservation efforts are permanent" (LTA 2010).

Seven trusts in North Carolina are accredited with LTA as of October 2010. I

interviewed respondents from five of these seven accredited land trusts and accreditation was a salient issue for two respondents since their organizations were actively going through the "rigorous" LTA process at the time of our interviews. These two professionals viewed accreditation as a necessary continuation of professionalization. Accreditation was forward thinking, in that it would help ensure the permanency of the land trusts work. As Brewer writes, “land trusts assume more responsibilities rarely thrust on small organizations”, referring to the fact that land trusts take on the task of legal protection and stewardship of properties for perpetuity—essentially, for all time (2003, p. 183). The organizations are thus, in turn, trusted by their clients and membership to plan for long-term stability.