- 39 -
“relatively natural habitat” for a community of Lake Huron tansy,
of pitcher’s thistle, and of bald eagles, among other species of
plants and wildlife. Each of the conservation easements will
therefore protect and preserve significant natural habitats by
limiting the development or use of the encumbered shoreline.17
By the same token, petitioners’ contributions of the conservation
easements operate to protect or enhance the viability of an area
or environment in which a wildlife community and a plant
community normally live or occur. Both portions of encumbered
shoreline also have natural values that make them possible places
to create or promote the habitat of Lake Huron tansy as well as
the habitat of bald eagles. We hold that petitioners have proven
that their contributions of the conservation easements were for a
conservation purpose under section 170(h)(4), specifically,
section 170(h)(4)(A)(ii).18
We turn to the question of whether petitioners’
contributions also meet the “exclusively for conservation
purposes” requirement of section 170(h)(5). We read that term to
place a focus on the contributee’s holding of a qualified real
17 We read sec. 170(h)(4)(A)(ii) to mean that the protection
of a relatively natural habitat of wildlife or plants, in and of
itself, is a significant conservation purpose within the intent
of the statute.
18 On the basis of this holding, we need not and do not
consider petitioners’ other arguments that the conservation
easements also meet the requirements of sec. 170(h)(4)(A)(iii).
Page: Previous 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011