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
MILLERTON — James (Jimmy) Cookingham, 51, a lifelong local resident, passed away on Jan. 19, 2026.
James was born on April 17, 1972 in Sharon, the son of Robert Cookingham and the late Joanne Cookingham.
He attended Webutuck Central School.
Jimmy was an avid farmer since a very young age at Daisey Hill and eventually had joint ownership of Daisey Hill Farm in Millerton with his wife Jessica.
He took great pride in growing pumpkins and sweet corn.
He was very outdoorsy and besides farming, loved to ride four wheelers, fish, and deer hunt. He also loved to make a roaring bonfire.
He was a farmer, friend, husband, father, son and brother. He will be missed by many.
He is survived by his father, Robert Cookingham, wife Jessica (Ball) Cookingham, daughters, Hailey Cookingham-Loiodice (Matt), Taylor Ellis-Tanner (Jimmy) and sister Brenda Valyou, as well as many cousins, nieces and nephews.
He is predeceased by his mother, Joanne (Palmer) Cookingham.
His daughter, Hailey, will always keep his legacy alive by their father-daughter antics, such as their handshake, nicknames and making “quacking noises” at each other.
Services/Memorials will be held at a later date.
The Kenny Funeral Home has care of arrangements.
SALISBURY — Herbert Raymond Franson, 94, passed away on Jan. 18, 2026. He was the loving husband of Evelyn Hansen Franson. Better known as Ray, within his family, and Herb elsewhere.
He was born on Feb. 11, 1931 in Brooklyn, New York.
When he was three years old, he emigrated to Sweden with his mother, Amy (Larson), father Carl Herbert and sister, Ruth. He was nurtured by members of his extended family. Being owners and managers of manufacturing plants in rural Sweden, they gave this curious “nuts and bolts kind of guy” access to machinery where he could satisfy his needs to repair and build parts for his kid-style projects. At 18 he returned to relatives in Marlborough, Connecticut who encouraged him to continue high school. He met classmate Evelyn, his English tutor and future wife, at East Hampton High School and they graduated in the class of 1949.
He joined the US Navy and served in the Mediterranean aboard the USS Midway and, during the Korean conflict, aboard the USS Pine Island. Upon discharge he attended Porter School of Machine and Tool Design under the GI Bill. He then apprenticed as a tool and die maker for Pratt Whitney Aircraft, then worked for Stirling Engineering, culminating as a mold engineer with Becton Dickinson, Canaan, Connecticut; much closer to his home on Twin Lakes. At B-D he was involved in molding technology and traveled to plants worldwide overseeing production of syringes used to deliver vaccines.
Along the way, he renovated and constructed three homes in Marlborough and Salisbury and in Rangeley, Maine.
Ray and Evelyn retired to Rangeley in 1992 after living at Twin Lakes for 25 years. He joined the Rangeley Congregational Church just in time to coordinate renovation of the church’s old barn into a community center. This led to the position of “clerk of the works” when the Rangeley Region Guides and Sportsmen’s Association renovated and enlarged their clubhouse in Oquossoc. RRG&SA honored his dedication with a Lifetime Membership. He also volunteered driving the RRHAT van and coordinated meal deliveries for the Housing Development. He served on various boards of the church chairing buildings and grounds for many years. In his eighties, Ray turned to designing and building scratch built wood models including the Drottningholm (on which he had emigrated), the USS Midway and the steamship Rangeley to mention a few.
Ray leaves his wife of 72 years, Evelyn (Hansen), his sister, Astrid F. Harrison of Cromwell, Connecticut, brother, Carl B. Franson of Lime Rock, son Kenneth and wife Christine of Wolfeboro, New Hampshire and Rangeley, Maine, daughter, Jean F. Bell and husband Rick of Salisbury. Grandchildren Kayla J. (Bell) Johnson and husband Brett of Salisbury, and Cody J. Franson, wife Maria and great granddaughter Francesca Evelyn Franson of Rangeley, Maine.
In lieu of flowers, monetary remembrances may be made to the Rangeley Congregational Church, PO Box 218, Rangeley, ME, 04970.
The Kenny Funeral Home has care of arrangements.
AMENIA — Moses A. “Tony” Maillet, Sr., 78, a longtime resident of Amenia, New York, passed away on Monday, Jan. 19, 2026, at Vassar Brothers Medical Center in Poughkeepsie, New York. Tony owned and operated T & M Lawn and Landscaping in Amenia.
Born on March 9, 1947, in St. Alphonse de Clare, Nova Scotia, he was the son of the late Leonard and Cora (Poirier) Maillet. Tony proudly served in the US Army during Vietnam as a heavy equipment operator. On May 12, 1996, in Amenia, he married Mary C. Carberry who survives at home.
Tony was a life member of the Amenia Fire Company with 51 years of dedicated service, actively driving fire trucks until his illness in Nov. of 2025. He was charter member of the Red Knights Motorcycle Club NY Chapter 33 in Pleasant Valley, New York and a member of the American Legion Post # 178 in Millerton, New York.
In addition to his loving wife, Tony is survived by a son, Moses A. Maillet, Jr. of Waterbury, Connecticut, and two brothers, Mark Maillet of New Port Richie, Florida and Bernard Ross of Cambridge, Ontario. He is also survived by two grandchildren, Moses A. Maillet, III and Jacob Maillet; a great-granddaughter, Mary Lillian Maillet and several nieces and nephews. Besides his parents, Tony was predeceased by three brothers, Theodore Poirier, Donald Maillet and Edward Maillet.
A memorial Mass will be celebrated at 11 a.m. on Saturday, Jan. 31, 2026, at Immaculate Conception Church, 4 Lavelle Rd., Amenia, New York with Rev. Andrew O’Connor officiating. Military honors and firematic services will follow the memorial mass at the church. Memorial contributions may be made to the Amenia Fire Company, 36 Mechanic Street, Amenia, NY 12501. For directions or to send the family a condolence, please visit www.hufcutfuneralhome.com
Telecom Reg’s Best Kept On the Books
When Connecticut land-use commissions update their regulations, it seems like a no-brainer to jettison old telecommunications regulations adopted decades ago during a short-lived period when municipalities had authority to regulate second generation (2G) transmissions prior to the Connecticut Siting Council (CSC) being ordered by a state court in 2000 to regulate all cell tower infrastructure as “functionally equivalent” services.
It is far better to update those regs instead, especially for macro-towers given new technologies like small cells. Even though only ‘advisory’ to the CSC, the preferences of towns by law must be taken into consideration in CSC decision making. Detailed telecom regs – not just a general wish list -- are evidence that a town has put considerable thought into where they prefer such infrastructure be sited without prohibiting service that many – though not all – citizens want and that first responders rely on for public safety.
Such regs come in handy when egregious tower sites are proposed in sensitive areas, typically on private land. The regs are a town’s first line of defense, especially when cross referenced to plans of conservation and development, P&Z regulations, and wetlands setbacks. They identify how/where the town plans to intersect with the CSC process. They are also a roadmap for service providers regarding preferred sites and sometimes less neighborhood contention. In fact, to have no telecom regs can weaken a town’s rights to protect environmental, scenic, and historic assets, and serve up whole neighborhoods to unnecessary overlapping coverage and corporate overreach. Such regs are unique to every town and should not follow anyone else’s boiler plate, especially industry’s.
Connecticut is the only state that has a centralized siting entity for cell towers. The good news is that applicants must prove need for new tower sites in an evidentiary proceeding and any decisions have the weight of the state behind them. The bad news is that the CSC used to be far less industry-friendly and rote in their reviews, which now resemble a check list. There is an operative assumption at CSC that if an applicant wants a tower, they must need it, otherwise why spend significant money to run the approval gauntlet? This reflects a subtle shift over the years at CSC from sincere willingness to protect the environment toward minimal tweaking of bad applications with minor changes. The bottom line is that towns really cannot rely on the CSC to do all the work for them.
What CSC issues telecom providers is a “certificate of environmental compatibility” after an evidentiary proceeding (not unlike a court case) with intervenors, parties, expert witnesses, and the service provider’s technical pro’s sworn in and subject to cross examination. Service providers get to do the same with any opposition from intervenor/party participants – like towns and citizens -- and their experts. It’s an impressive process whose ultimate goal is the fine balancing between allowing adequate/reliable public services and protecting state ecology with minimal damage to scenic, historic, and recreational values. They unfortunately often fall short of their mandate – like approving cell towers with diesel generators over town aquifers -- evidenced by CSC only rejecting about five cell towers in the past 15-20 years.
The CSC was founded in 1972 and clarified its mission in the 1980’s to prevent the state from being carved up willy-nilly by gas pipelines, high tension corridors, and broadcast towers. With the sudden proliferation of cell towers beginning in late 1990’s, it became the most sued agency in Connecticut by both an arrogant upstart industry if applications were denied and by towns/citizens when bad sites were forced on them. CSC gradually formed a defensive posture that drives their decisions toward industry with deeper pockets and attorneys on retainer.
For citizens, nothing can wreck one’s day like the CSC. It behooves towns to protect what little toolkit they have, and understand the legal parameters of the CSC’s playing field. The CSC is not a “normal” government agency where municipal/citizen redress is based on logic and local support. Their process is largely immune to everything but specific kinds of evidence – like town regs with setbacks/fall zones, radio frequency transmission signal strengths, sensitive areas identified, and detailed wildlife inventory, among others.
There is a current cell tower fight involving two intervening towns -- Washington and Warren; both with good cell tower regs – over a tower site within 1200’ of a Montessori School, near Steep Rock’s nature preserves with comprehensive geology/wildlife databases that include endangered, threatened and special concern flora and fauna, on established federal/state migratory bird flyways, within throwing distance to a historic site capable of being listed on the Underground Railroad, and with an access road on a blind curve entering a state highway that will permanently damage wetlands, vernal pools, and core forests. There are well credentialed environmental experts, including Dr. Michael Klemens, former chair of Salisbury’s P&Z, as well as the former director of migratory bird management at the US Fish and Wildlife Service, and an RF engineer testifying to alternative approaches, plus three attorneys representing intervenors. It is the most professional challenge I have seen at CSC since Falls Village successfully mounted one that protected Robbins Swamps several years ago.
The hearing is ongoing, with uncertain results. To see what it takes today to stop an inappropriate tower siting, see Docket #543 under “Pending Matters” at https://portal.ct.gov/csc before removing local cell tower regs – the lowest hanging fruit that any town can possess in case it’s needed.
B, Blake Levitt is the Communications Director at The Berkshire-Litchfield Environmental Council. She writes about how technology affects biology.