Opinion: Further elaboration
To the editor:
This letter is intended to elaborate on information contained in the Dartmouth Week article under the headline: “Land trust, family clash over land dispute.”
The Dartmouth Natural Resources Trust is suing us because we refuse to sell them land that they contend we are legally obligated to sell. The DNRT’s stated purpose in seeking ownership of the land is to save it from development. If the DNRT is successful in acquiring the land, they are on record as stating that they will find it necessary to develop a portion of the land in order to defray some of the high cost of buying it; that is, they will develop some of the land in order to save it from development.
We have offered the DNRT an alternative – a conservation restriction. A conservation restriction differs from a sale in three respects : 1. The cost to the DNRT is hundreds of thousands of dollars less than buying the land. 2. All the land will be saved from development in perpetuity. 3. The DNRT will not own the land.
The DNRT asserts that it is not "financially feasible" for them to buy a conservation restriction, yet they have filed suit in order to force us to sell them the land for hundreds of thousands of dollars more. It appears the DNRT finds it more important to own the land and develop some of it, than forsake ownership and see no development whatsoever.
Ken Goes and Lizzie Orcutt,