Conservation easements, on the other hand, are more like restrictive covenants than easements. In other words, a landowner who enters into such an agreement not only signs away his right to change the use of the land, but also gives away the rights of any future owner to change the use of the land. When a landowner dies, the heirs inherit the property along with whatever affirmative obligation is required by the terms of the conservation easement. For example, if the original owner of the land agrees to perform certain management practices, the heir must continue the practices as long as he owns the land. If he doesn't or if he doesn't do it to the satisfaction of some third party, he can be sued by the third party for breach of the terms of the conservation easement.
Conservation easements do provide excellent tax breaks for landowners in the short run.
In the long run, however, private property owners are actually hastening the transfer of private land into public hands. Because conservation easements place an affirmative obligation on every subsequent landowner, it seems only logical that at some point in time, an heir who cannot afford to adhere to the terms of the easement will look for a way out. When that happens, the pool of potential buyers is going to be fairly small. Furthermore, since the property has lost its productive potential because of the easement, the selling price would likely be quite low. If the distressed heir could not find an individual interested in owning property with encumbrances, he might then consider donating the land to some government entity or nonprofit land trust, take advantage of the federal income tax benefits that come with charitable contributions, and not look back.