why protected lands are still degrading — and what to do about it

You did everything right. You negotiated the conservation easement. You closed the deal. The land is "protected" in perpetuity.

And now it's degrading anyway.

Invasive species are spreading. Fire risk is building. Water quality is declining. The forest you protected is becoming a liability instead of an asset.

This is the stewardship funding gap — and it's one of the least discussed failures in conservation finance.

protection ≠ stewardship

A conservation easement restricts development. It doesn't fund management.

When a land trust accepts an easement, it takes on a perpetual obligation to monitor and enforce the terms. But monitoring is the easy part. The hard part is active stewardship:

Land trusts typically require a stewardship endowment contribution when accepting an easement — usually $1,500-5,000 per parcel. At 4-5% annual draw, that generates $60-250/year.

That's not enough. It covers monitoring visits. It doesn't cover management.

the math doesn't work

The Land Trust Alliance reports over 60 million acres under conservation easement in the United States. But stewardship endowments are chronically underfunded:

• Average endowment contribution covers monitoring, not active management
• Many older easements have no endowment at all
• Endowment returns barely keep pace with inflation
• Climate change is increasing stewardship costs (more fire, more invasives, more extreme events)

The result: lands that are legally protected but ecologically degrading.

This isn't hypothetical. Ask any land trust director about their most challenging properties. They'll describe easements where:

• The original landowner is gone
• The current owner isn't interested in stewardship
• The endowment generates $200/year
• The property needs $50,000 in restoration work

why traditional funding fails

The fundamental problem: conservation finance is optimized for acquisition, not stewardship.

Funders want to "save" new land. They don't want to pay for invasive removal on land that was "saved" twenty years ago. The urgency of acquisition always wins over the slow grind of management.

perpetual proceeds: a different model

Ensurance creates perpetual funding streams that don't depend on grants, donors, or endowment returns.

Here's how it works:

specific ensurance certificates

Specific ensurance certificates are tied to individual natural assets — including conservation easement properties. When you issue a certificate for a protected property:

1. Investors purchase certificates tied to that specific land
2. Certificates are yield-bearing — holders receive ongoing returns
3. Proceeds flow to stewardship — funding active management, not just monitoring
4. The funding is perpetual — as long as the certificates exist, proceeds flow

This isn't a one-time grant. It's a permanent funding mechanism built into the financial infrastructure.

how proceeds work

Ensurance proceeds are modeled after natural water cycles — continuous flows that sustain ecosystems over time. When certificates trade, when coins circulate, when the protocol operates:

• A portion of activity generates proceeds
• Proceeds route to designated stewardship accounts
• Agents manage and deploy funds
• MRV verifies outcomes

The land trust doesn't need to write another grant application. The funding flows automatically.

(See how to fund conservation for 512 years for more on the proceeds mechanism.)

agents for property-level coordination

Each protected property can have its own ensurance agent — an onchain account that:

• Holds stewardship funds
• Tracks ecological outcomes
• Coordinates with contractors and land managers
• Reports to stakeholders transparently

This creates accountability at the parcel level. No more pooled endowments where it's unclear which property gets what.

what this looks like in practice

Scenario: A regional land trust holds 200 conservation easements across 50,000 acres. Current stewardship endowment: $2 million, generating ~$80,000/year. Actual stewardship need: $500,000/year.

Traditional approach: Annual fundraising campaigns, grant applications, deferred maintenance, triage decisions about which properties get attention.

Ensurance approach:

1. Issue specific certificates for the 20 highest-priority properties
2. Each certificate is tied to a named natural asset with defined stewardship needs
3. Investors purchase certificates — they're tradable, yield-bearing, and fund real conservation
4. Proceeds flow to property-level agents
5. Agents deploy funds for invasive removal, fire treatment, restoration
6. MRV documents outcomes for funders and regulators

Result: Perpetual stewardship funding that doesn't depend on the grant cycle.

for land trusts: getting started

This can start with a single high-priority property as a pilot.

existing instruments are live

You don't need to wait for new infrastructure:

• General ensurance coins — tradable today, proceeds support natural capital broadly
• Specific certificates — issue new certificates for your properties
• Agents — create stewardship accounts for each property
• Markets — live trading, immediate participation

frequently asked questions

how is this different from a traditional endowment?

Endowments generate returns from invested principal (typically 4-5%/year). Ensurance proceeds are generated by protocol activity — trading, circulation, utilization. They're not limited by principal size and can scale with adoption.

who buys these certificates?

Investors seeking exposure to natural capital with real, verifiable outcomes. This includes impact investors, foundations, family offices, and individuals who want their investments tied to specific places they can visit.

what if nobody buys our certificates?

Start with general ensurance participation while building the specific certificate market. Proceeds from coins also fund stewardship. You don't need to sell out a certificate offering to receive proceeds.

how do we report this to our board and donors?

All proceeds and stewardship activities are tracked onchain and via MRV systems. You get transparent documentation of funding sources and ecological outcomes — better reporting than most grant-funded projects.

does this work with our existing legal structure?

Ensurance instruments are financial tools that fund stewardship activities. They don't change your easement terms or land trust governance. The stewardship still happens through your existing processes — it's just funded differently.

the bottom line

Conservation easements promised permanent protection. But protection without stewardship is just slow degradation.

The lands you've worked so hard to save need ongoing investment — not just at acquisition, but forever. That's what perpetual means.

Ensurance creates the funding infrastructure to actually deliver on that promise.

related reading:

• how to fund conservation for 512 years — the proceeds mechanism for perpetual funding
• what is ensurance? — the fundamentals
• what is an ensurance agent? — how agents coordinate stewardship

Explore specific ensurance certificates →

See how agents work →

Talk to someone about land trust stewardship →