Land trusts gain ground through collaboration

Julia Rogers of the Housatonic Valley Association recently gave a presentation to the Warren Land Trust on strategic land protection priorities.
Photo by Connie Manes
Editor’s note: This is the first of a two-part series focusing on how land trusts in Northwest Connecticut are working in concert to tackle conservation challenges.
The nearly two dozen land trusts in rural Northwest Connecticut may be small, but they are mighty when it comes to collaborative conservation efforts.
A first-of-its-kind research project examining the pace and scale of conservation in the state’s Northwest Corner illustrates the extent of this collaboration.
Working with 19 land trusts, the Kent-based Northwest Connecticut Land Conservancy (NCLC) has collected and documented data showing the total amount of land that has been conserved each year in the region over the past decade.
The publication’s findings, said Catherine Rawson, executive director of NCLC, will serve as a roadmap to future conservation efforts.
“It’s not every day that we release a publication that demonstrates that work. It’s a fantastic vantage point from which to look out into the future and gauge how much land we expect to protect by 2023.”
Northwest Connecticut, said Rawson, is the first and only region in the state to track and prepare data on the pace of its collective conservation efforts.
“We are grateful to work in this community of strong conservation partners. It is so exciting to share the collective summaries of the region’s land trusts and what they are all able to accomplish together,” said the NCLC executive director.
Tim Abbott, Housatonic Valley Association’s (HVA) regional conservation and Greenprint Collaborative director, said he views the new NCLC report, titled “The Pace and Scale of Conservation in Northwest Connecticut” as a much needed “call to action.’
“It’s sobering and inspiring,” said Abbott. “It supports data that is coming in from beyond our region. And that is that we need to be doing more and on a wider scale” to meet the pressures of the changing climate and adverse human impact on the environment.
“If we do it piecemeal,” he said,” that won’t be up to the scale of the threat. You need partners.”
Joining forces
Collaboration among state and Litchfield County land trusts, said those in the field, has gained momentum in the past decade.
In increasing numbers, land trusts have come to realize that partnering with other agencies or larger entities can allow for greater transaction expertise, increased funding opportunities, enhanced credibility, more organizational capacity, shared resources including staff and technology, cooperation on easement stewardships, positive publicity, and increased land protection overall.
“The addition of professional help for land trusts has been huge,” said Bart Jones, president of the 35-year-old Cornwall Conservation Trust, Inc. (CCT), who credited collaboration as a game-changer and said professional help “makes fundraising for conservation work critical.”
He noted that the trend away from all-volunteer land trusts started in earnest about 15 years ago through shared resources and resulted in a heightened level of professionalism and credibility.
“We couldn’t have acquired as much land as we have without it,” said Jones of his organization.
Accreditation, too, has upped the game for land trusts.
“The other thing that has shifted is the emphasis on land trust standards and practices,” said HVA’s Abbott. More than half of the state’s 30 or so accredited land trusts are in the Northwest Corner and belong to the Litchfield Hills Greenprint Collaborative.
“Northwest Connecticut land trusts have taken accreditation very seriously. It gives us a common language and helps us feel comfortable that we are all talking about the same things,” added Connie Manes, Greenprint director and executive director of the Kent Land Trust (KLT).
Regional partnerships
As land conservation becomes more urgent, complex and expensive, land trusts are being creative in expanding their leverage and capabilities by forging regional conservation partnerships with entities like the Cornwall-based HVA, Northwest Connecticut Land Conservancy and others.
For instance, HVA’s Follow the Forest initiative unites land trusts and communities against the persistent threat of forest fragmentation. Important woodland species need room to roam, and unbroken stretches of forested land act as a “wildlife highway,” providing safe habitat and food.
“None of us lives in isolation, which is quite clear when you look at the extensive wildlife corridor of which we are smack in the middle,” noted KLT’s Manes.
“Animals and birds don’t stop at town lines and people don’t either,” said Manes, who owns a private equity consulting firm and chairs the Kent Conservation Commission.
Manes, like many other land trust members interviewed, wear several “hats” in their capacity as conservationists often serving on town land-use boards in addition to volunteering or directing at various nonprofit groups, or as private consultants.
Community outreach targets students
Maria Grace, executive director of the 300-member Sharon Land Trust (SLT), which boasts nine public preserves with 24 miles of hiking trails and includes Kent and Salisbury in its area of operation, stressed the importance of community outreach programs aimed at adults and children.
SLT is a partner of Follow the Forest, a regional initiative that seeks to protect and connect forests and promote the safe passage of wildlife throughout the Northeast, from the Hudson Valley to Canada.
Grace spoke enthusiastically about recent field trips and outdoor adventures held jointly with the Salisbury Association Land Trust (SALT) and HVA’s Paul Singer.
“We educate people about our forests and how they need to better connect them,” said the SLT executive director. Field trips with students include training on how to access connectors and collect data.
Strength in numbers
Land trusts are finding creative ways to support each other.
For example, Kent and Warren conservationists recently joined forces with the purchases of their adjoining preserves, Kent Land Trust’s East Kent Hamlet Nature Preserve and Warren Land Trust’s soon-to-be-open Cunningham Road Preserve.
SLT’s Grace pointed to the 52-acre Tory Hill property, near the Lakeville/Sharon border, as a prime example of successful collaboration with SALT.
Tory Hill was a joint project involving several landowners, the state of Connecticut, and others to preserve a prime scenic vista obscured by rampant spread of invasive plant species.
Working in tandem, the two land trusts collaborated, raised funds and closed on the open space, which is managed by the Salisbury Association.
Double protection on easements
Holding conservation easements on each other’s preserves is also a way land trusts join forces.
“Sometimes it’s desirable to have double protection on a property, where a land trust owns the property, and another land trust holds the conservation easement on it, so both are monitoring the property and making sure it stays preserved,” explained Shelley Harms, a private land consultant since 2014 who serves as executive director of both the Salisbury and Cornwall land trusts.
Harms also volunteers as co-president of the Norfolk Land Trust (NLT) and has assisted several other groups with acquisition grants and accreditation projects.
Speaking of collaboration, she said, “Norfolk Land Trust owns a property that Winchester Land Trust holds the easement on, and Norfolk Land Trust holds an easement on property owned by Colebrook Land Conservancy, also on property owned by Aton Forest, also on property owned by Great Mountain Forest.”
A regional organization like NCLC, Harms pointed out, also has capacity to work in a town where there isn’t a local land trust. She also credited NCLC for hosting Green Drinks, where land trust officials meet informally to discuss various topics, and by hosting the small area land trust meetings.
Shared mapping, monitoring systems
Several land trust leaders also pointed to NCLC’s technology assistance in the form of its shared LENS aerial photo monitoring system.
“Both HVA Greenprint and the Northwest Connecticut Land Conservancy have been helpful to the smaller land trusts,” said Harms. “HVA has a terrific map person, Stacy Deming, who does our conservation maps.”
SLT’s Grace praised the value of a shared satellite monitoring system. “We have about 50 parcels, so it allows us greater flexibility,” particularly when it comes to annual inspections required under the accreditation process, she noted.
“We now have 11 land trusts who use our purchased satellite software to inspect their properties,” reported NCLC’s Rawson.
‘A tightly-knit, collegial group’
The sharing of staff is vital to success, said Manes. Land trusts share not only administrative staff, but also summer interns, bookkeepers, and AmeriCorps teams of service youth.
“We share information about what works in our organizations, examples of policies, procedures and grant applications. We co-sponsor trainings and public educational programs, and we conduct public outreach.”
At one point, she noted, HVA was sharing an administrative person with three different land trusts.
“It may seem byzantine when one first encounters the many organizations working in land conservation in New England, but the people, the countless impassioned volunteers and professionals who work on conservation in our region and throughout Connecticut are a tightly-knit, collegial group.
“We have a head start on collaborative efforts because the trust, relationships and infrastructure for collaboration are already here, built over decades to a place of great strength and opportunity.”
Coming up: Northwest Corner land trusts bear the burden of region’s conservation future.
Cornwall Conservation Trust
(860) 248-3255
cornwallconservationtrust.org
Housatonic Valley Association
Cornwall Bridge
(860) 672-6678
hvatoday.org
Kent Land Trust
(860) 488-9185
ketlandtrust.org
Norfolk Land Trust
(860) 307-8380
norfolklandtrust.org
Northwest Connecticut Land Conservancy
Kent – (860) 927-1927
ctland.org
Salisbury Association Land Trust
(860) 435-0566
www.salisburyassociation.org/land-trust/
Sharon Land Trust
(860) 364-5137
www.sharonlandtrust.org
Paul Singer of the Housatonic Valley Association and Diane Fitzmeyer Murphy of the Salisbury Association guided children from Salisbury Central School on a field trip earlier this year focused on habitat connectivity and wildlife corridors. Photo Submitted
Ruth Franklin and Ileene Smith in conversation at Congregation Beth David in Amenia.
Congregation Beth David in Amenia hosted a conversation on the enduring legacy of Anne Frank, one of the 20th century’s most iconic figures. Ruth Franklin, award-winning biographer and critic, shared insights from her highly acclaimed book “The Many Lives of Anne Frank” with thought-provoking questions from Ileene Smith, Editorial Director of the Jewish Lives series. This event, held on July 23 — the date Anne Frank would have turned 96 — invited the large audience to reconsider Anne Frank not just as the young writer of a world-famous diary, but as a cultural symbol shaped by decades of representation and misrepresentation.
Franklin and Smith dove right in; Franklin reading a passage from the book that exemplified her approach to Anne’s life. She described her work as both a biography of Anne Frank and a cultural history of the diary itself, a document that has resonated across the world.
“The diary,”Franklin explained, “has been appropriated in ways that sometimes obscure the reality of who she was and the historical context of her life.” By weaving together different perspectives, including testimonies from those who knew Anne or whose lives were shaped by her, Franklin sought to rehumanize a figure who has, for better and worse, been turned into a symbol.
Franklin’s book examines the many faces of Anne Frank that have appeared in the public consciousness: the girl whose diary became a universal symbol of the Holocaust, the teenage diarist whose words offer an optimistic glimpse of humanity, and the historical figure whose Jewish identity has at times been obscured in favor of a broader, universal message. Franklin highlighted how Anne’s legacy was shaped by her father, Otto Frank. Many of Otto’s decisions have been viewed as controversial such as removing passages that could have alienated potential readers. While often criticized, Franklin suggested that his editorial work was driven by the desire to reach the broadest possible audience.
“I think we have to be so generous in thinking about Otto Frank and the choices that he made,” said Franklin. “He made the decision that he wanted the diary to be read by the greatest number of people possible. He wanted Anne’s message to go out into the world and work, as he said, against prejudice, understood in the widest possible sense. The Anne Frank House today in Amsterdam is carrying on his mission in making Anne’s story relatable and accessible and comparing it to many other different kinds of prejudice around the world. Not everybody agrees with this approach, but that’s what he decided to do.”
The conversation turned to a quote from author Cynthia Ozick, who argued that Anne’s story has been “vulgarized, distorted, and infantilized” in adaptations of the diary, particularly those created for mass consumption. While acknowledging the validity of Ozick’s concerns, Franklin pushed back. The desire to make Anne’s story accessible to a global audience, Franklin suggested, began with Anne herself, who rewrote her diary with an eye toward future readers who might not understand her specific historical context.
The conversation also delved into the profound grief and ambivalence Otto Frank must have felt as he worked to preserve his daughter’s legacy. Franklin’s expressed deep empathy for him, burdened with making Anne’s diary into something more than a personal testament. “He was working with a tragic loss, with an immense responsibility,” Franklin noted.
The evening’s discussion expanded to include the contentious debate over the graphic version of Anne Frank’s diary, which has been banned in several U.S. states. Critics of the graphic adaptation have condemned it for including depictions of Anne’s developing sexuality, citing them as “pornographic.” Franklin pointed out that this outrage stems from “the intersection of homophobia and anti-Semitism” in today’s political climate, highlighting how Anne’s legacy continues to be embroiled in ongoing cultural and political struggles. “The books that are most frequently banned in the country right now are those that have to do with LGBTQ content.This is a serious issue of the Republican Party persecuting gay people and trans people more generally,” said Franklin.
Smith pointedly asked Franklin about what is widely considered the most famous quote from the diary: “In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart.” Franklin responded, “In many ways, Anne Frank was an optimistic person and that quote is an accurate reflection of who she was. At the same time, that quote is incomplete. It actually comes in the middle of a much longer passage in which she describes feeling hopeless about the future of the world.” Franklin continued, “That quote is often dismissed by Holocaust scholars or other people who have said with a lot of confidence that if Anne Frank had survived the camps to write about it, she would no longer have believed that people are truly good at heart. My own position, which is the perspective I adopt in this book, is that none of us can know what a surviving Anne Frank would have thought about anything at all, and it is irresponsible to speculate about it.We simply can’t go there. “
As the conversation concluded, the room was filled with a sense of reflection and appreciation. The crowd was invited to continue the conversation in the Community Room, where Franklin signed copies of her book, which were available through Oblong Books. Her visit left attendees with much to ponder about how we interpret history, memory, and the cultural artifacts that endure.
Yuja Wang performs with the TMCO and Andris Nelsons.
Sunday, July 20 was sunny and warm. Nic Mayorga, son of American concert pianist, the late Lincoln Mayorga, joined me at Tanglewood to hear Yuja Wang play Prokofiev’s Piano Concerto No. 2 in G minor, Op. 16. I first saw Wang on July 8, 2022, when she filled in for Jean-Yves Thibaudet on the opening night of Tanglewood’s summer season. She virtually blew the shed down with her powerful and dynamic playing of Liszt’s Piano Concerto No. 1.
Nic was my guest last season on July 13, when Wang wowed us with her delicate interpretation of Beethoven’s Piano Concerto No. 4. We made plans on the spot to return for her next date in Lenox.
As we found our seats there was a buzz in the Shed. A huge crowd had gathered. Nic went for tall cans of cold mineral water — essential. The Tanglewood Music Center Orchestra was on stage. The door opened, and out stepped Wang in a brilliant shear and sparkling silvery light dress befitting the warm day. Conductor Andris Nelsons followed. They greeted concertmaster Nathan Cole, and settled in.
The first movement, an Andandtino -Allegretto - Andandtino, is one where a 22-year-old Prokofiev distinguishes himself as an entirely new breed of concerto composers. It is far from typical. There is no conventional drama between opposing forces of piano and orchestra — just a light, gentle phrase with intentionally muted strings (pizzicato) and clarinets, giving way to Chopin-like left-hand figures from the piano, and a lengthy, divine melody in the right. There is beauty in this.Wang is in charge.
She transitioned to a faster march section that evolved into an extended solo played with great precision and attention to detail. The soloist had the floor until a raucous return of the full orchestra, followed by a pianissimo recollection of the opening. The two great forces now united, everyone was on the edge of their seat.
The second movement is a Scherzo: Vivace. Here, Wang showed her mastery over one of the most challenging sections — a relentlessly demanding moto perpetuo where the soloist must play unbroken sixteenths, both hands, in octave unison. Nic agreed that one must see this type of playing live to fully appreciate the artist. The orchestra added wonderful, subtle color and counter moods to this virtuoso spotlight. Wang’s command of the minutest shifts in tempo was astounding. The piano, here, produces melodies but also becomes a percussion instrument of the highest order.
In the third movement, an Intermezzo: Allegro moderato, the soloist gets a breather from the speedy tempos — but not quite, as she must alternate between delicacy and great force in figures while the orchestra layers a backdrop of a heavy march. Wang displayed her versatility here, commanding the tone, volume and moods as dictated by Prokofiev’s adventuring. Tempos changed. Everything changed. Yet throughout, each mini stanza and bar stood out — authentic, independent, real. Likely exactly what Prokofiev had in mind, but likely to elude all but the finest musicians.
In the Finale: Allegro tempestoso, Prokofiev reverts to the more conventional opposition-of-forces theme — the piano trying to overwhelm the orchestra in a barrage of flittering bright passages offset by heavy-handed chords. Wang chose a more collegial approach here. She was firm but polite; it never felt like a struggle. This made the transition to the next idea — where clarinets and violas offer a contrasting tranquility — smooth as silk. The solo piano continued with elements of Russian folk music, joined by the orchestra, building intensity before another solo piano display, and then a traditional buildup to a sweeping conclusion.
I glanced over at Nic’s joy and bewilderment. A standing ovation was followed, with encore performances of selections from Sebelius’s 13 Pieces for Piano, Op. 76, No. 2: Etude; Schubert’s “Gretchen am Spinnrade,” D. 118, arranged by Liszt; and Horowitz’s Variations on a Theme from Carmen.
Prokofiev’s debut of this concerto in 1913 did not go over quite as well. Some in the audience expressed displeasure at his ideas, hissed and rushed out. But Prokofiev expressed his displeasure at their poor taste, played an encore nonetheless, and fanned the flames. Sometimes a genius from one generation is misunderstood in his time but vindicated generations later by audiences and musicians of a different era. Such is the case with Prokofiez, who had the last laugh. Yuja Wang has her place in this saga. That she performs with the young musicians of the Tanglewood Music Center Orchestra shows her generous nature and kind heart — she cares about the future of classical music.
If you are curious and like to travel, Wang will play Prokofiev’s Piano Concerto No. 2 again several times this season: Nov. 13 at The Philharmonie de Paris; Dec. 4 and 5 at The Konzerthaus, Vienna; and Dec. 12 at The Concertgebouw in Amsterdam. I highly recommend it.